Third class.....
Those former contesters who have grown tired
of the on line bitching, complaining and accusations;
and now given up on contesting , reverting back to a
more simple and relaxing style of radio operation.
Glenn VA3DX
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] World Wide Digi DX Contest Results.
It seems to me that VA3VF is sitting on the fence. It is clear that, in
ham radio, there are two basic classes of contest operators, drivers and
passengers. Drivers decode other transmissions themselves, and everyone
else is a passenger. This is independent of mode.
Could there be room for for a third class - data-processing contesters?
VA3VF implies there might be - I say no chance! When and if the FT craze
dies out, there will be yet another "more-advanced data mode" to take its
place and, once again, its users will be passengers. Sure, it will still
be contesting of one kind or another - your machine competing with my
machine.
73,
Paul EI5DI
On 12/01/2020 18:20, DXer wrote:
Hi Peter,
That's a valid concern, and the excerpt from the committee message you
quoted should 'buy' all critics some time:
"For the FT mode it is not yet clear where the fault is..."
Read the preceding messages again, and you'll see that was not the issue.
The issue there, whether 'flowered' or not, was still FT-X is not
hamradio, no skills, boring, unsophisticated users, etc.
As I said before, FT-X contesting is not likely to be my 'thing', but
give it a chance, if you are concerned about contesting.
If you are still in 'mode wars' mood, give it a rest. Other 'experts' say
the FT craze will die out in 3 years or so, let it happen on its own
then. Natural death is one thing, 'premeditated murder' is another.
73 de Vince, VA3VF
On 2020-01-12 12:56, Peter Sundberg wrote:
But there is a major problem when the contest committee tell us that
they had to waive the NIL penalty because otherwise a large number of
stations would end up with a negative score.
Furthermore the committee states the following:
"In the legacy modes, the "fault" for a NIL is most always on the side
that logged the QSO. For
the FT mode it is not yet clear where the fault is, but in any case, the
amount of NILs is
abnormally high. Going forward, FT contesting needs to better define how
QSO partners can reliably
communicate whether a QSO is complete and should be logged. The
responsibility resides both
with contest participants and FT contest software developers."
Yes Vince, a contest is a contest and the goal is the same. But when the
operator is unable to decide whether a QSO should be logged or not, to
me it that's a clear indication that automation has gone too far.
Especially when the committee says that the amount of NILs is abnormally
high.
The operator is "in the back seat" and certainly NOT up front driving.
Now that's where there's clearly room for criticizing the concept.
73
Peter SM2CEW
_______________________________________________
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
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|