Mark,
Let's get to the meat of the matter: You have said you don't oppose remote
operation. WHY do you oppose remote operation during a contest?
What is different about it?
Are you worried that the remote operator gains some advantage with remote
operation? Example: A W6 operates a contest from his home station remotely
from a hotel in Europe. Are you afraid they will be using a local
receiver? That cat is out of the bag long ago -- there are worldwide
remote receivers on the net, and this has nothing to do with remote
operation. The ability to cheat in contests has zero to do with
technology. People who want to cheat will always find a way.
Are you opposed because it's just "different"? I would understand your
opposition if that were the case. That is a typical gut reaction.
It is interesting that the most popular remote operating gear comes from a
company in Sweden, and the Finns have already done large remote contest
operations.
So, I would say there are plenty of people in Europe who agree with remote
operation -- and in contests.
I'd also note that unless an operator happens to disclose that they are
operating remotely, you probably would not have clue they are doing it. In
quite a few contests in the past couple of years, operators have only
revealed the fact after the contest.
Unless a contest sponsor states that remote operation is not permitted, I
don't see anything but growth in this facet of contesting.
73, Gerry W1VE
On Tue, Apr 16, 2013 at 7:37 AM, M. WIJK <pa5mw@home.nl> wrote:
>
>
> Op 04/16/13, "C. \"Fred\" Johnson" <fredwt2p@gmail.com> schreef:
> > Ladies and Gentlement of CQ-Contest:
> >
> > Excuse my anger,
> >
> Better leave that home.
> And my apologies if my expression affects you in any way.
> I have absolutely no reason to undermine your expertise and respectable
> work.
> I just think differently about the radio game part.
>
>
> > I guess the relatively young constesters who came up with this (remote
> ops); EI5DI, aren't real operators.
> >
> We contest a lot.
> From May till september we spent experimenting, testing and upgrading our
> station(s). Be it at home, our remote station(yes we also own one) or at
> our clubstation.
> From october till end of may we are active at different stations. As an
> operator, at times as designer/tester/builder only.
> It doesn't make us a "better or lesser" HAM radio operator, or "man"
> (please stop using that kind of expression) this is a FUN hobby.
>
> Yesterday I checked and verified if my expression perhaps was too far
> off-centered.
> Certainly there is freedom of speech, although you need to relativate ones
> own opinion somehow. Being outspoken is not always appreciated, we Dutch
> are way overdoing that too often, I know.
> But I strongly believe it IS important to show another view every now and
> then.
>
> The first two HAM ops I talked to (from two different EU countries) told
> me they strongly agree on my full opinion.
> (let me put that short again: admire remote operating; greatly respect all
> inventive work, but disagree the remote use during contesting)
> Both hams are active in many contest, either at home or at different
> clubstations. They participated in 5 contests this year only.
> Yesterday evening I spoke to a ham who is a regular op at one of the most
> succesfull MM stations in Europe and he stated: operating your remote
> station via the internet during contests is currently allowed, but it
> should be put in a different separate category.
>
>
> > . But.. apparently doing that makes me less of a "man" in this "hobby":
> >
> Sorry if comments make you feel that way.
> Maybe it is because off centered opinions aren't that much appreciated?
> And yes, sometimes comments are moving the wrong direction.
> No need to debate it to death/ feed it endlessly, points usually are
> already made.
> I would rather visit and see your great efforts and then discuss my
> opinion over a beer.
>
> >
> > Not "man(woman) enough:"
> > -Compete
> > -Build a station
> > -- Overcome said obstacles of building a remote station in a BIG A** CITY
> > -Keep it interesting in the day and age of other things that keep people
> interested.
> >
> Much appreciate the work done.
> I have seen soo much progress these last few years. In fact the lecture
> (want the powerpoint?) on remote site operation (RX only) via the internet
> I gave a few times is waaaayyyyy outdated by now.
> I could not keep up with all things happening and the amount of new info
> from the internet, so I stopped doing it. Technical progress is a fine
> thing!
> That also is a big FUN part in our hobby.
>
>
> >
> > I applaud the CQWW committee for the Extreme category. It *had* my mind
> racing of how things can be done given the TOOLS available to us now.
> >
> Yes,that is a very good decision!
>
> > Reading your posts makes me think that it's otherwise, that we are
> always just going to be second class operators. Fine.
> >
> No-way-Jose.
> Please continue to enjoy remote operating.
> Let others opinions' not stop you from having fun.
>
>
>
> >
> > You know what? Keep your "no lids and space cadets" thing going. Soon,
> the ham bands will die out and you will not have anything (or anyone) left
> to have "pure RF conversations" on. And I, as a formerly fervent ham radio
> operator, will cheer the day it happens.
> >
> >
> > 73 and GL,
> > WT2P
> > "PROUD REMOTE OPERATOR"
> >
>
> In case anyone does not understand the principle of our shared opinion
> here on 'No remote operating during contest' please keep asking. Sure there
> are more who share this opinion who can explain.
> For me there's no reason to continue this when I see this discussion
> slowly going south.
> Please enjoy your way of contesting, whichever way that may be.
>
> 73 Mark, PA5MW
> ...-.-
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|