So Ron,
By the logic of your comment below, couldn't someone just as easily just
"listen" on the air, copy a few calls that VP6DX worked (to give him/her a
range to validate his claim) and then submit his 'manufactured' QSL card for
credit?
There are plenty of ways to 'cheat' the system if you are so inclined...
I have to agree with Sauls comment...pass out the valium...
73, Marty
W1MD
_______________________
Chuck,
You're still confused? OK. Let's try it this way.
W3WH (who doesn't live that far from me) worked VP6DX on 12 meters. (Not a
contest QSO, incidently!) I didn't.
With an open log, it is child's play for me, should I have been so inclined
(and I'm not), to look up the exact time of the QSO and claim that they
actually worked me. Further, with an open log, I can even look up adjoining
QSO's to "prove" that it was actually me.
Now multiply that a couple of hundred times for people who just "have" to
show that they were in the log on a particular band or band/mode.
THAT is why the ARRL DXCC program is against open logs.
That you can print an "e-Card" and slip it past the field checkers is beside
the point. If you really wanted to, you could make up a card from scratch
these days and try the same thing. That says more about your integrity, to
even try this, than I care to get into. But because you could pull a
fraudulent action like this -- and by your own admission have done so at
least four times, even if just to "prove a point" -- does not make the
entire program a sham.
And because you think the entire program is a sham, you have the right to
try to tear it down or destroy it for the rest of us?
-----Original Message-----
From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
[mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com]On Behalf Of KI9A at aol.com
Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2008 9:42 AM
To: w4tv at subich.com; cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Public access to logs
I'm still confused with this one.
I think a VAST majority of DXCC submissions come from a contest like the
CQWW!!
This publication of logs is one of the silliest threads yet. In this day of
computers, and great color printers, I can manufacture about any QSL I want,
short of the obvious really rare ones, and, even at that, I'd bet lunch that
I
could slip 70-80% of phoney cards past ARRL field checkers. Like I said
before, on purpose, I printed off 4 EQSL cards, and asked 3 members of the
local
DX club ( all honor roll guys), which 2 were DXCC filed checkers, if they
saw anything wrong with submitting these cards. They all looked, and said
all
the info was there, and looked fine. Then I told them they were printed
from
EQSL. At that point, they changed their minds. Now, if I were not with
conscious, I could have submitted those cards, and got credit for them.
DXCC is a sham anymore, it is meaningless now days.
So, what is more of harm? Publishing a guys log, or, being able to fool
honor roll DXCC'ers ( and field checkers), with bogus cards?
Exactly what is the issue with seeing a published log? Online, or not, if
my
call is not in that log, I don't get a card....And, if I were a loser, I
could still make up a card on my computer, with all of the info on it (
phoney
of course), and submit it, and with a 99% chance, I'd get credit.
I have well over 300 DXCC worked, and 4 band DXCC so far with low dipoles.
I
have a paper that says I have 125 confirmed, and, that is stuck in the
drawer, maybe some day I can line a birdcage with it, but, I have
satisfaction of
knowing I am a member of the 300+ DXCC ham community.
73-Chuck KI9A
In a message dated 3/2/2008 12:24:40 A.M. Central Standard Time,
w4tv at subich.com writes:
> Not sure I get this comment: Just what, exactly, is CQ trying
> to "get away with"?
To violate the rules of DXCC.
> CQ does not answer to the ARRL. And I can think of no law or
> regulation, that CQ is obliged to obey, forbidding the
> publication of logs.
CQWW is a DX contest ... the first, and preeminent DX awards
program is DXCC. It certainly looks like CQ does not care
about anything beyond their little "world" at best or are
intentionally trying to damage DXCC at the worst.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sandy Taylor [mailto:ve4xt at mts.net]
> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2008 12:31 AM
> To: 'Joe Subich, W4TV'; KI9A at aol.com; cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] Public access to logs
>
>
> That's exactly why all of my eQSL cards explicitly state "not
> valid for any award." It takes a little common sense rather
> that trying to "get away with something" like CQ is doing.
>
> Not sure I get this comment: Just what, exactly, is CQ trying
> to "get away
> with"?
>
> CQ does not answer to the ARRL. And I can think of no law or
> regulation,
> that CQ is obliged to obey, forbidding the publication of logs.
>
> 73, Kelly
> Ve4xt
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|