CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] Increasing contest participation

To: cq contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Increasing contest participation
From: Steve Sacco NN4X <nn4x@embarqmail.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2013 14:53:56 -0500
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>

You also need to consider "date/time".  It's important for many awards.

73,
Steve
NN4X


On 12/5/2013 9:02 AM, Larry wrote:
> "Same call sign/same band/same mode = dupe."
>
> Not necessarily. You may need to consider QTH. If you move more than 25 miles you get to start WAS over as an example. But that is a different topic from the subject at hand.
>
> 73, Larry  W6NWS
>
> -----Original Message----- From: James Cain
> Sent: Thursday, December 05, 2013 6:04 AM
> To: Steve Lott
> Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] Increasing contest participation
>
> Steve,
>
> The subject line of my post was just a "teaser." (I used to be a newspaper editor and one of my jobs was writing headlines.)
>
> The solution to overloading LotW is for LotW not to store dupes. Same call sign/same band/same mode = dupe. This purging of dupes would be done at LotW and participants could opt out of it if they want their LotW log to continue to show dozens of "QSLs" from the same station on the same band and mode (although I can't imagine why they would).
>
> My own 25,000 QSLs on LotW are, to make a wild guess, maybe as much as 75 per cent dupes, since I work the same contests, and the same stations, year after year. Go ahead LotW, purge away!
>
> I don't know where you got that line about "The responsibility of a QSL ..." It is not apropos to my proposal. LotW is a "Third Party." Think QSL managers, for another example of a "Third Party." Or how about using your credit card to order a QSL, and getting a QSL with a printed sticker and maybe no signature? How many third party hands (and machines) did that transaction pass through?
>
> Have you noticed how many DXpeditions offer "order-a-QSL" with no desire for a QSL from you? And how many DXpeditions now will send the QSO info for you to LotW after you send them a couple of dollars? You can even order an LotW credit and opt out of receiving a paper QSL (my favorite). These methods seem to have perfectly adequate safeguards for integrity (checking the log, etc). These are the waves of the future.
>
> I heard from a couple of people who treasure their collection of 100,000 paper QSLs filed away in homemade wood cabinets. Nothing will take that away from them. But not all of us live in the town we were born in.
>
> My proposal in no way would affect hams who want to pay for printed QSLs and send them through the mail. But ask a young person what they think about exchanging "post cards" through "the mail" to prove that they talked to somebody on their radio, and watch their eyes glaze over.
>
> Jim Cain, K1TN
>
>
>
>  Jim on the surface (first glance) this may seem like an easy answer
>
>
> However if the sponsors uploaded in bulk to the LOTW server there would be many crashes of the LOTW site
>
>  the band width would be extraordinary
>
>
> The responsibility of a QSL is still the station operator, not a third party.
>
>
> I think we see plenty of increased activity in several of the bigger contest
>
>  like CQWW and ARRL SS as well as Sweepstakes
>
>
>  cheers!
>
>
>  steve
>
>
>
>  KG5VK
> _______________________________________________
> 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>