CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL and Open Logs - Time for the next step?

To: wc1m@msn.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL and Open Logs - Time for the next step?
From: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 18:42:02 -0700
List-post: <cq-contest@contesting.com">mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
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 valid QSOs for 
the entrant even if the other party to the contact did not participate 
in LoTW.  In other words, is it any more valid that a log submitted by 
F2xxx to LoTW confirms a QSO with me than a log submitted by F2xxx for 
an ARRL (or CQ) contest that got forwarded to LoTW after log checking?  
In the second case, F2xxx would not need to participate in LoTW ... only 
I would need to.  If there is a problem with that, it would seem to 
imply that ARRL is more worried about cheating for DXCC than for major 
contest results.

73,
Dave   AB7E



Dick Green WC1M wrote:
> However, I'm not sure it buys anything to upload partial logs with only
> confirmed QSOs to LoTW. LoTW won't issue a QSL for a busted call, so it
> doesn't matter if the QSOs are confirmed by the contest sponsor or not.
> Also, it's possible for the log checker to disallow QSOs that are perfectly
> legitimate for LoTW (e.g., QSOs made during an off-time or outside contest
> hours.)
>
> 73, Dick WC1M
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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>