Re: [CQ-Contest] L.O.T.W.

["Igor Sokolov" <ua9cdc@r66.ru>]

Really strange that we find so many supporters of "bullet proof"
security used in the LOTW.
IMHO DXCC program is no different from most of the contests. In fact
it is sort of contest with no time limit.
Is somebody on this reflector going to dispute that winning CQWW is
more difficult then winning 5BDXCC.
If one managed to win CQWW he had probably built a station and
developed operating skills  to the extend that allow that person to
get 5BDXCC quite quickly.
I hope nobody on this reflector will dispute that getting awarded for
winning CQWW is no less honorable then getting 5BDXCC.
Yet the security of judgement in CQWW  is purely based on the
analyses of the submitted logs and sometimes on some additional
information available to the contest sponsors. Why DXCC program
should be that more important. Why should it require security
exceeding that of some of the financial institutions? Why there are
supporters of that high security requirement here on the contest
reflector? Why then they do not question the security of contest
logs? Would it not be a topic more appropriate for the contest
reflector?

73, Igor UA9CDC


> > I don't want to reduce security. I want the security processing
to occur at
> > the ARRL's end, not at the user's end.
> >
> > This is how the banks do it. It works for them and it should be
plenty good
> > enough for us.
>
> Okay. The banks verify who you are by requiring you to appear in
person
> at the bank with suitable ID. From now on, all LOTW registrants
must
> appear in person at ARRL HQ to register. Are you happy now?
>
> --lyndon


_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest