CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] LOTW and Contest Logs

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] LOTW and Contest Logs
From: Robert Chudek - K0RC <k0rc@citlink.net>
Reply-to: k0rc@citlink.net
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2012 16:17:50 -0600
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
I was asked where to find the LoTW help reflector and thought others might benefit if I replied in this followup message.

The LoTW reflector can be found here: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ARRL-LOTW/

Note this reflector is NOT managed by the ARRL. It's a regular Yahoo!Group that was established in September of 2003 and now has over 2,000 members enrolled. Recent discussions include the progress being made to increase the throughput of the LoTW system, and what impact some of the NH8S records will have because they were uploaded as CQ Zone 31 (instead of 32).

73 de Bob - KØRC in MN

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 12/13/2012 2:06 PM, Robert Chudek - K0RC wrote:
Hello Ed...

Theoretically that idea should work fine, i.e., automatically ingesting adjudicated contest logs into the LoTW system. Technically is would "only" take a process of requirements gathering, software design, coding, testing, implementation, and support. Casting all that aside, there's another issue...

I believe some people would not be as philanthropic as you, when you wrote: /"However it seems a shame that my logs that are clearly //"//in the system" for contest results can't be put to good use by those that do like LOTW and that the league can't get more revenue from it."/

It would be argued that their personal activity should not be a revenue source for "the league" in any manner. You only have to look at the controversy that irrupted regarding the "open logs" policy of the CQWW contests. And there's NO money involved with that! That boils down to the "loss of control" over their data.

But I am curious why you chose to not upload your logs to LoTW for the benefit of other operators? You did participate in the system 5 years ago, according to the "Last Upload" for your call sign. Your QRZ page says /"I am QSL Manager for 9M6/N1UR, XX9TEP, C6ARS, A52UR, PJ2E..."/ and none of those calls have ever participated. I would think you would make a lot of people happy by loading those contacts into the system.

I will say the support for getting users "up and going" on the system has REALLY improved since the last time you participated. There's also a reflector dedicated to helping walk people through the process when their initial attempt(s) get derailed.

73 de Bob - KØRC in MN

------------------------------------------------------------------------
On 12/13/2012 10:15 AM, Edward Sawyer wrote:
I agree that LOTW could be considered "off topic" for contesting. However,
if the "backlog status and report" is going to be paraded in front of us
then this topic is more relevant than that topic, in my opinion.

I personally am not an LOTW user. And I don't feel like spending the time to "re-certify my legitimacy" to be on it. However it seems a shame that my logs that are clearly "in the system" for contest results can't be put to
good use by those that do like LOTW and that the league can't get more
revenue from it.

Mike, W0MU, has completely missed my point on "faked contacts". The League has put all of its integrity eggs on the "validation of the source of the
log" from LOTW but none on the "quality of the log data".  The Contest
organizers, with CQ leading, have put all of their eggs on "verifying the
QSOs actually occurred" but truly very little on "did you really operate
from where you said you did?".unless someone actually accuses someone of a
non-legit operation.

At the end of the day, the DXCC desk already has a system on making sure
that a contact does not get DXCC credit with a bogus operation. They do it with every paper QSL submitted. So the same system can be used to make sure that "tentative LOTW confirmations" don't get DXCC credited when applied for
if the log uploader doesn't have sufficient documentation to prove where
he/she was and with permission.

By having a system that puts security on the "upload" rather than at the
"DXCC credit" point (which is ironically exactly what the paper based system has been for the past decades), the ARRL LOTW has limited itself immensely in what should be a very painless expansion by just adding all final contest
logs to LOTW.

Its too bad but I am sure far too "bought in by the administration" and far too political to be changed. Lets just realize what "could be" if it were
done differently.

Ed  N1UR
_______________________________________________
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

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>