J
*im, I agree with much of what you said........*
*In fact more so than you prob thought from my original reply (one of the
big down falls of email, not seeing the non verbal feedback)My direct reply
to each of your thought lines, below......*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.)
*Sure, I get it, no problem*
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).
*I don't disagree that the technology can make it work*
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?
*LOTW as well as the Buro etc are all Tools for QSLing*
*we the OP need to do something to make it happen*
*Even though I upload all of my Q's (To LOTW), whether they be casual ones
or contest QSO's*
*when I receive a snail mail card I reply with a snail mail printed card*
*So where did I get that line* "The responsibility of a QSL"
*from my old school teachings*
*I consider receipt of a QSL the same as a Hand extended for a hand shake,
I accept and shake the hand*
*Even though I personally would rather be done with snail mail of cards,
LOTW is much more efficient, reliable and cost effective !!!*
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.
*Yes they are waves of the future and I embrace them, I even use and offer
OQRS for Ti5/KG5VK again not everyone does, yes there are some that still
use paper logs.*
*While I love computer logging, even when portable, I respect those that
prefer paper logs and snail mail of cards*
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.
*again, yes I get it*
*Your idea has merit, however it will load down the ARRL server at times*
*will the ARRL be willing to add more hard ware for this*
*On their own dime ?*
*Who will coordinate it, there are often great ideas without extended
thought to the con's as well as the pro's (how does this affect the
hardware and the software)*
*Is this the future, sure - how soon only time will tell :)*
*Not everyone is young and many still want paper, snail mailed to them :)*
*Jim, thanks for the dialogue*
*I enjoyed the conversation !*
*Cheers!*
*steve*
*KG5VK*
Jim Cain, K1TN
On Thu, Dec 5, 2013 at 5:04 AM, James Cain <jamesdavidcain@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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
|