I hope so. I see absolutely no reason for them not to do it. I understand that the scenario they used to worry about was that K4xx, for a hypothetical example, would see a QSO with N4xx by a rare sta
Pete, Without reopening the debates over LotW, this is not possible. When a station "signs" and uploads QSO data to LotW, that data is signed using the station's private key. By design, ARRL does not
Considering that you haven't actually operated a contest in 20+ years, isn't it a moot point for you, Joe ? Give it a rest. Let's not have a repeat of the same "discussion" on this subject that we ha
Joe, you're just trolling for an argument, right? ARRL owns the database. If they chose to do so, they could certainly access it, add confirmed contest QSOs to it, and so on. The private key/public k
The I guess you won't be submitting logs to cqww... at least if the rules stay like 2007's: 4. We want your electronic log. The Committee requires an electronic log for any possible high-scoring log
Joe Subich, W4TV schreef: Hamradio and contesting is a hobby, not a life. Comparing contest logs with account balances and other private things is a bit exaggerating. If the contest sponsor decides t
Everyone now, Let's see if we all can just ignore Joe's comments and not start another useless thread. Thanks. 73 Saul K2XA _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-
Whoa Pete, put the brakes on. I submit my logs to LOTW after every contest. It has become a part of my 'post-contest' routine, as it has for many. I don't need/want the ARRL or CQ or NCJ or whoever d
Not so. There's no need for the contest sponsor to sign the log. The contester would simply use TQSL to sign the log with his/her LoTW private key before uploading it to the contest robot. A copy of
Not quite, the data in the LotW upload is not the same as that in the Cabrillo file required by the contest sponsor. tQSL extracts the necessary data (call, band/frequency/mode/start time) from the
They certainly could do that. However the current data structure of LotW and most Cabrillo formats are significantly different. It would take major changes on both sides to make them compatible. Tha
Maybe I misunderstood Pete's proposal, but I thought the presumption behind it was that QSOs verified by the contest sponsor (especially if the sponsor was the ARRL) could be loaded into LoTW as vali
N4ZR: Obviously CQ (or ARRL, or Contest-Sponsor-XYZ) needs my logs to score their contest. But I could make a pretty good argument that those logs are a private document transacted between me and the
I respect Dick's views on this, because of his intimate knowledge of both the LOTW system and ARRL contest policy. However, I think that these implementation issues can be ironed out, if we don't los
Right. I'd forgotten that TQSL strips data required by the contest sponsor. Pete's proposal would require a TQSL mod, perhaps a special contest mode that would leave all data intact. A contest-specif
No, Pete specifically said both participants had to have LoTW certificates. And the answer to your question, "is it any more valid that a log submitted by F2xxx to LoTW confirms a QSO with me than a
Hans, As it has been quoted here recently, the CQWW Rules pretty much defeat your argument. "By submitting a log to the CQ WW Contest, the entrant agrees to have the log open to the public"(CQWW Rule
You could claim copyright because you created the log albeit with the help of a program. However, the sponsor need only put a statement in the rules indicating that by submitting a log copyright is
Perhaps, in the ARRL's view, the results of a single contest only matter for 12 months, while DXCC records are "forever". Therefore validated contact information in LOTW would assume a higher priorit
Ummm, because by submitting to the contest sponsor, you've entered into amateur radio's version of an adhesion contract. You agree to abide by their terms if you want to submit. Its that simple. ____