[OKDXA] CW Skimmer now "a modest proposal"

[Robert Redmon]

Personally, I think technology like cw skimmer and other multiple 
channel computer decoding schemes are fascinating and can see their 
value as contesting tools. However, using them further removes operator 
knowledge, skill, and conditioning from the equation. I watched another 
of my competition oriented hobbies quickly evolve itself into 
obsolescence and hate the thought that the same might happen to 
contesting in ham radio.

I personally would rather participate in contests where everyone ran  
dipoles and 100 watts. Winning would come down to knowledge and skill 
and the desire to win.  But, alas, in a world where the ends seem to 
always justify the means, I suspect that such an attempt would be both 
naive and futile. Consequently, I forward a "modest proposal." Rule 
human intervention out of the system entirely. Allow no human 
intervention and just let the computers and the mega buck stations go at 
it, processor to processor.

73, Bob K5SM



Ken Adams wrote:
> N5PA wrote:
>> I am probably the only one on the globe that thinks this way, but I 
>> am all
>> for CW Skimmer and SO2R, no problem with the technologies at all.  
>> But I do
>> feel that they ought to be in a separate category rather than the normal
>> single operator category.  
>
> This is basically my position also.  It is indeed an advancement in 
> technology, but I believe if you are single op you should be copying 
> the code between your ears.
>
> And, BTW, in the upcoming ARRL Sweepstakes CW if you use skimmer you 
> can only claim class U or M.  Yes, you can blame me for that. :-)
>
> 73, Ken K5KA
> Sweepstakes Contest Manager
> _______________________________________________
> OKDXA mailing list
> OKDXA at mailman.qth.net
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/okdxa
>