Is this really a big issue? How many CW contest entrants fit this
description? I suspect that it is a small minority if there are any at all.
I think that for discussion purposes, the likely very small minority of
operators who need this form of technology-based CW copying assistance can
be addressed through an exemption to whatever rule is established for the
vast majority who don't need or want such an operating aid.
In other words we would have a rule:
1) CW Unassisted Single Op is: blah, blah, blah
a) Exemption: If an entrant is "either physically or mentally unable
to copy by ear, or by eye, or by typing what they can see or hear" he may
choose to use a single channel decoder technology to allow him or her to
participate.
I don't think anyone would object to this, nor have I seen anyone say
otherwise.
de W5OV
-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of David Robbins
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 6:43 AM
To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Revised 2011 NAQP Rules
inadequate and not politically correct... you need a better definition that
accounts for those who are either physically or mentally unable to copy by
ear, or by eye, or by typing what they can see or hear.
Jan 3, 2011 09:06:57 PM, w4pa@yahoo.com wrote:
W5OV:
>The focus instead should be "what are the characteristics of an unassisted
>single op"?
Ear, not eye.
Scott
W4PA
_______________________________________________
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
|