I don't think that would be legal. There are two parts to a "DX spot" that BOTH
contain
information:
1. the station's call
2. the frequency where that station is
Even if you only give someone SOME of all available information you are still
giving assistance.
The key here is that it is a frequency where another station is known to be
located.
Note that you CAN do something slightly different: find the location of all
signal peaks on a band.
Those can be determined mathematically without needing to decode the station's
callsign. Signal peaks
could equally well be coming from RFI from your neighbor's plasma TV or someone
tuning up as another
contest station. This is what I do in my software SO2SDR. No internet is needed
to do this. Yes, they can
then be used to determine what frequencies are clear.
Tor
N4OGW
----- Original Message ----
From: Jack Haverty. <k3fiv@arrl.net>
To: brian coyne <g4odv@yahoo.co.uk>
Cc: "cq-contest@contesting.com" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Mon, February 25, 2013 3:03:15 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Single Op/Get Scores Assisted
Imagine a server on the Internet. Let's call it Prospector. You send
your logs to it, in real time. It collects logs from a lot of people.
It also collects information from Skimmers et al. Maybe WWV,
WSPRNET, etc too. It knows a lot about what's going on, who's on
what frequencies, who's talking to whom right now, what bands are open
to where, etc.
When you connect to Prospector, you give it your profile. So it knows
what your equipment can do, what contest you're working, and it knows
the rules of that contest. It can compute your score from your log
transmissions, and display your running score for spectator amusement.
In return, Prospector sends you a constant stream of information. No
callsigns or exchange information is included. It merely sends
frequencies, and a projection of how many points you might make if you
QSYed there. So a target frequency, or even just a band segment, with
lots of juicy multipliers would get a high potential-point rating.
That rating would be based on your current personal situation, i.e.,
knowing from your log what mults and stations you've already worked,
etc. It could also tell you whether to make a quick single-Q Pounce,
or to go set up shop and start a Run. It might even suggest a
frequency that is clear.
Someone using Prospector would, to me, seem to be "unassisted" by the
WRTC rules 12.4 and 12.5. You would still need to go and copy the
callsigns and exchanges by ear. All the service does is suggest
frequencies to be investigated.
However, I suspect Prospector would prove very helpful in getting a
bigger score. You don't really care what callsigns you work. It's
only the point value that's important.
How's that for a hole?
IMHO, the Internet is a communications mechanism which can provide a
rich source of information. If you use the Internet to glean any kind
of information that might affect your score, you're being assisted.
If you use *only* ham radio to collect any kind of information, you're
unassisted. If you use any form of communications other than ham
radio, it's potentially assisting you.
73,
/Jack de K3FIV
[PS - it wouldn't surprise me at all if someone says that Prospector
already exists...]
On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 9:57 AM, brian coyne <g4odv@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> Ah - ha _ I see yet another multi thread post coming on re what is, and what
> is
>not, assistance.
>
> Why cannot all Contest Committees adopt the WRTC Standard ruling which makes
> it
>pretty clear, to me anyway, what unassisted really means...
>
>
> 12.4. Use of DX spotting (e.g., Packet, Web, etc.), skimmer or any
> other spotting and supplementary information network is not allowed. You are
>not allowed to receive any assistance to learn the callsign or
> exchange of any station other than by tuning the radio and listening by
> human ear.
> 12.5. The use of any callsign database or the ‘Super Check Partial’
> tool is not allowed. If the logging software incorporates this kind of
> feature, it must be disabled. The logging computer(s) may display a
> ‘Check Partial’ list based only upon the callsigns already worked during the
>contest.
>
> Can anyone really pick holes in that? That is the way I like to play it, no
>assistance, audio or visual.
>
> 73 Brian 5B4AIZ / C4Z.
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|