Why does the sponsor of the contest need to ask permission to make rule
changes? I can assure you that remotes were being discussed within the
CAC for a long time. CQ contest also allows remotes in the same fashion
as the ARRL. Why do are they getting a pass?
Regardless, I think it widely agreed that remote is less desirable than
in person.
What exactly is the problem? It seems nobody wants to talk about the
objections but keep falling back on how rules are written or what words
are used to describe it.
Kevin N5DX might take exception to what I wrote as he has done some
pretty amazing things remote, but even he might say he could do better
at the station.
I think remotes might be being blamed for some really really nice
stations being built in the last 5 or so years that just happen to
incorporate remote. I would too if it was my station. No brainer!
I think it would help if those opposed would just admit what the real
issue is and stop beating around the bush.
W0MU
On 3/17/2024 5:22 PM, kq2m@kq2m.com wrote:
JP,
If you are going to quote me, then at least make a good-faith
attempt to get it right.
from my previous post:
"First, the ARRL, when whomever decided unilaterally to treat remote the
same as just using a keyer, they did so without ANY open discussion
with the
contesting community. It was simply included DE FACTO. No notice, no
discussion, NOTHING that
I ever saw.
Had remote operating been openly discussed by the ARRL at that time, I
would have formally made my objection TO THE ARRL at that time to
REMOTE NOT being in it's
own separate REMOTE category.
REMOTE would have it's own NON-Assisted and Assisted categories of
course."
Bob, KQ2M
On 2024-03-17 10:00, JP wrote:
NOT according TO KQ2M. AND you KNOW he’s SERIOUS because he’s SAID SO.
I love all the passion over ham radio points.
J.P. W2XX
On Mar 17, 2024, at 5:19 AM, Hal Offutt
<hal@japancorporateresearch.com> wrote:
Hold on, guys,
Please don't lump remote operating with assisted operating. They are
totally different animals. Remote is simply a means to operate a
station, whether it's in your basement or on the other side of the
world. It does not confer any kind of advantage. Paul Bourque's
description is perfect: remote is merely a long mic (key) cord.
73, Hal W1NN
Remoting my station in Ohio from Tokyo since 2011 (and always
unassisted)
On 3/17/2024 3:31 AM, Stewart G. Hoar wrote:
Paul's "connected" suggestion offers an honest description of
contesters who choose to increase their fun by adding internet
support to traditional radio communications. Some of us enjoy old
fashioned (pre-internet) contesting, many others enjoy the boost
that spotting networks, remote operation, and online scoreboards
have added to our hobby.
We don't need another category, but I think replacing "assisted"
with "connected" is a fine idea.
73 Stu N7ZZ
________________________________
From: CQ-Contest
<cq-contest-bounces+stuhoar=msn.com@contesting.com> on behalf of
Paul O'Kane <pokane@ei5di.com>
Sent: Saturday, March 16, 2024 6:59 AM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Assisted or Connected
It seems to me that the term "Assisted" is outdated, as it predates
the
internet (remember packet cluster). In any case, all relevant
technology assists, leading to never-ending debate about what
should, or
should not, be regarded as Assisted.
The term "Connnected" describes it better. When you connect to an
external (to your station) network for the purpose of finding,
facilitating, or making QSOs, you are Connected. When you spot
others,
you are Connected - because you are advertising your presence over the
internet. Self-spotting is Connected.
Remote entrants are Connected because, by definition, they are obliged
to connect to an external network.
If you prefer to enter as Unconnected, then stay away from the
internet
while contesting.
73,
Paul EI5DI
ps - for completeness and consistency, the use of multi-channel CW
decoders would continue to be regarded as "Connected".
_______________________________________________
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
|