RTTY Robots? I missed that one - must have been before my time. I am all for having multiple tools in the toolbox - I have a couple ATNO DX using FT8 - they count towards my DXCC totals; however, if FT8 continues on its path, those contacts will - if not already - have an astericks next to it.
Who told you that? Most ops are not in favor of full-auto as you can see on the threads on the Zed. And I suspect as you will find out on the many pages this post of yours will stir up.
Just a thought experiment. Let's say fully automated FT8, or any other digital mode for that matter, becomes the norm. What are you going to do a few months from now, after the bot has likely worked every station on earth? One may 'earn' all sorts of awards that way, now what? That said, automation of one form or another will always be available and/or used. I also have an interest in MW BCB DXing. Since the advent of good SDRs, some people have been recording the entire MW band overnight, and 'logging' the stations later. This is totally acceptable now, no disputes. I don't record anything, not my thing, the other reason being I would not have the time to 'analyze' the recording for the loggings. There is one MW BCB DXer that uses a tagline that I find funny, but true: Heard with my own receivers, in real time, with my own ears.
I'm not in favor of fully automated FT8, but, why should YOU "asterisk" the QSO? You manually used your equipment and made a valid exchange, the issue of a live operator Vs a robot on the other end is moot. YMMV
Try it again on CW, SSB, SSTV, FAX yada yada yada? There is wspr, which is pretty much the definition of autonomous. For amateur radio, the bright spot isn't using the autonomous software to earn awards, it is in developing the autonomy. It isn't easy to get right.
Indeed, and that's assuming one is 100% sure a bot was on the other end of the contact. This 'asterisk' thing is happening on Topband, when the OP finds out that he/she did not really make it all the way to the other end, since the other OP was using a remote receiver in the US.
That's true, but those inclined to setup a bot are less likely to use those modes, unless they can be automated as well. And this is why I support continuous developments, even if I don't use/like it. One never knows what the next development will be, it could be a good one. This is the reason we don't use spark anymore.
Why would an award chaser want to automate? In this case I agree with those that say the computer earned the award, not the OP.
