To: | <cq-contest@contesting.com> |
---|---|
Subject: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings |
From: | "Ward Silver" <hwardsil@gmail.com> |
Reply-to: | Ward Silver <hwardsil@gmail.com> |
Date: | Sun, 27 Apr 2008 19:50:21 -0700 |
List-post: | <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com> |
> [*] Am I the only one who thinks that outlawing or categorizing > automated receiving technology, while allowing all manner of automated > transmitting technology, is logically inconsistent? Dealing with automated reception differently than automated transmission is appropriate because only reception can initiate a QSO; whether in response to a solicitation (CQ) or from tuning to a solicitation (S&P). Reception is qualitatively different in this regard than transmission. 73, Ward N0AX _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] SKIMMER = BUMMER, n6tj |
---|---|
Next by Date: | Re: [CQ-Contest] SKIMMER = BUMMER, Joe Subich, W4TV |
Previous by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings, Joe Hetrick |
Next by Thread: | Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer musings, Joe Subich, W4TV |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |