CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] L.O.T.W.

To: Jim Rhodes <k0xu@iowadsl.net>, <CQ-CONTEST@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] L.O.T.W.
From: Bill Turner <dezrat1242@ispwest.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:23:41 -0700
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
At 11:12 PM 7/23/2005, Jim Rhodes wrote:
>Actually I have sent them support for running it just the way that they do.
>I found it truly simple to set up and run. And I find the level of security
>to be appropriate. And I am sure that you did not just log onto your bank's
>website & set up an account remotely. You had to go into the bank and sign
>up for an account. The ARRL did not make you do that, so they need some way
>to make you prove who you are. When was the last time you made a deposit
>over the internet? The comparison of LOTW to internet banking is really a
>bogus one.

_________________________________________________

I agree about the initial level of security during the sign up phase. The 
ARRL's requirement to send the password only to the address in the FCC's 
database seems OK to me. What I object to is the number of hoops one has to 
jump through each and every time one wants to upload a log. All that should 
be necessary is to go to the LoTW website, enter one's username and 
password, and upload an ADIF file. Period.

When was the last time I made a (bank) deposit over the internet? How about 
every payday? How about every pension deposit? How about every Social 
Security deposit? I pay nearly all my bills over the internet... doesn't 
that count as a 'deposit' into their account? My point is, financial 
transactions are handled simply and easily with perfect security. LoTW 
should strive to do the same.


Bill, W6WRT

_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>