Ron,
It isn't a presumption. WPX is set up on LOTW, and the cost is 12 cents
per QSO.
I agree with a flat fee, but I'm thinking more along the lines of $5 or
$10. Possibly charge 0.12 per QSO up to that maximum. The lower the fee,
the more likely people will be to use the system. While I don't want the
ARRL to lose money on LOTW, I think fees should be reasonable.
To keep this contest related, a lrge number of my confirmed prefixes
have been worked during contests.
73,
Jim N6VH
On 5/1/2017 4:55 AM, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote:
Well, that's just it, Mike.
The presumption in this particular subthread is that if WPX is ever
set up for LotW, the per confirmation fee will be the same as it
currently is for the ARRL awards. That's actually a heck of a
presumption.
If I were asked, which I have not been, I'd recommend a flat fee for
the basic award, rather than a per confirmation charge (on top of the
actual fees for WPX itself). Something reasonable -- it costs $$ to
run and maintain the LotW server, after all -- but not outrageous or
out of line. Would $25 be out of line, considering the alternative
of how much it would cost (even over a long period of time) to gather
the physical cards themselves?
W5VX may accuse me of missing the point, which of course is out of
context considering his PM to me. But I don't believe that I have.
The simple fact is, TANSTAAFL. Somewhere, someone has to pay the
bills. The ARRL can not continue to do so out of membership dues,
and it is not unreasonable to ask those applying for these awards to
cover some of the reasonable administrative costs. If & when other
awards are brought online, the same issue of covering those
administrative costs will still exist. We all wish it were
otherwise, and we could go back to the days when the costs were
hidden... but those days are long gone.
73, ron w3wn
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|