Well, I'm sorry that you don't want to hear any dissension. But I fail to see why the number of posts I have made have any bearing on the continued erosion of trust in fellow contesters. And... since
Bob: Considering that the "erosion of trust" in an underlying reason, if not the only one certainly a major one, behind the issue of Open Logs, I don't see how the two issues can be separated. I find
Re: "I have found in nearly 40 years of playing this game that the top competitors have always shared their information with each other and anyone else who asked. No one should object because no one
I find it interesting that you challenge me to explain why my log should not be made public, yet continually refuse to explain why I should. So you get to refute my reasons, but refuse to permit me t
Wally: With all due respect: Don't shoot the messenger. Jaime is reporting the results, and changes in categories, that he was told by the CWQ WW committee. If he was misinformed of the LZ9W entry ca
Comparing NS3T's web site to the discredited tabloid "News Of The World" is more than a bit much. C'mon. The point was made. Heaping it on to the point of insults is overkill... and starts to make me
Clearly there remains a misunderstanding about what the "Assisted" class means within the context of Amateur Radio Contesting. "Assistance" has always indicated that the Operator(s) has received info
Mats, There's two factors involved here. One is a bunch of anti-contest whiners, who spend time immemorial complaining on the various internet forums about "those darn contesters." Notice that those
Are you kidding me? Do you really think that if someone is determined enough to cheat, they'll stop with such a device? I can think of a few ways to get around this... never mind what, I have no desi
I do not appreciate my comments made on another reflector being brought over here out of context, for the sole purpose of provoking an argument and creating mischief and chaos. And since we don't kno
I'll go you one better. What if I find xx8xx on my own... a very short time later you tell me "hey, xx8xx is on yy.xxx," and someone overhears it. Am I "assisted" because someone tells me something,
However... as a practical matter, there's no real hard and fast way to verify that the check you use actually is the aforementioned year. Yes, today there are plenty of databases around, but until th
Art, It sounds like you know who the two stations are and you have email addresses for them. If I'd overheard this, I'd email both stations and tell them exactly what you observed. And I would defini
Marc, Sad to say, encourage them all you want, but you will never get a good many non-contesters to submit a check-log. In fact, I dare say that some will simply throw up their hands and say "why bot
I see your point. So one might want to wait to tell either or both of them until after logs had been submitted. That is a moral judgement that only the operators can, and should make. And frankly, if
Jim, My understanding from current and former Hq people I've talked with is that this practice (giving DXCC credit based on logs submitted for the ARRL DX contests) was discontinued sometime in the e
When did I NOT say that LotW wasn't alive & well? W5VX speculated that "the ARRL has never been entirely on board with LOTW". I was just pointing out that Wayne N7NG was a big, vocal proponent of it
Any time that there is a rule change, or a category addition or deletion, or a rescheduling, there will be -- always! -- unintended consequences. That should not be, in and of itself, a reason to avo
If you don't know who they are, don't call them. If, as a S&P station, you don't want to wait for an ID, move on to work someone else. Some stations ID after every contact. Some after every other. So
I understand. And I know it's frustrating. But it's one thing to wait (as frustrating as it is) on a "rare" Zone 23 station. Odds are pretty good he knows he has the zone to himself and can do things