I guess I did... Great!
73, Gerry
On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Richard DiDonna NN3W <nn3w@cox.net> wrote:
> I think you misread my post. I support the disclosure of logs. And am
> pleased the CQWW committee has resisted the undertoned efforts of the ARRL
> to squelch the opening of logs through the auspices of the DXCC program.
>
> 73 Rich NN3W
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Gerry Hull
> To: Richard DiDonna NN3W
> Cc: CQ-Contest
> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 2:39 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL and Open Logs - Time for the next step?
>
>
> Richard, Hans, etc....
>
> First of all, you do not keep your log private. If you kept it private,
> you would not submit it to the contest committee, you'd simply keep it to
> yourself, and claim victory among your friends. ARRL and CQ, or any other
> contest committee, has the right to determine if a log is to be public or
> private.
>
> As has been stated on this reflector, and is clear from the rules, once
> ARRL or CQ has the log, it becomes property of the respective organization,
> and they can do with it as they wish. From the ARRL prospective, I'm sure
> the CAC will make a future decision about publishing based on rational
> input.
>
> In the contest world of 2008, these arguments are academic -- CQ has
> published the CQWW logs for the past couple of years, and I'm sure, will
> continue to do so. It has just been just pointed out on this reflector
> that publishing the logs has helped the committee in resolving some pesky
> issues. So, there are MANY good reasons for publishing the logs.
>
> I just don't buy the "this is the way it's always been done" argument. In
> my opinion, there are more benefits the contest community at large from open
> logs than from protecting an individuals rights to the log information. Of
> course, you guys are free to offer a dissenting opinion.
>
> I presume all this fuss and reflector traffic is de to lack of propagation
> on the radio, so we all have a lot of time to blather on email.
>
> 73, Gerry W1VE
>
> On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 6:52 AM, Richard DiDonna NN3W <nn3w@cox.net>
> wrote:
>
> Oh, so since the the technology for QSO analysis, skimmer, and spot
> analysis
> is readily available, there are no secrets and the argument re: "I keep my
> log prviate so as to not alert the competition" is now void . Hence, no
> reason to keep the logs private.
>
> You've proven our point for us. Thanks OM!
>
> 73 Rich NN3W
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "K0HB " <k-zero-hb@earthlink.net>
>
> To: "K1AR John" <K1AR@aol.com>; "CQ-Contest" <CQ-Contest@contesting.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 10:57 PM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL and Open Logs - Time for the next step?
>
>
>
> > Note to K1AR:
> >
> > See below. I rest my case.
> >
> > 73, Hans, K0HB
> >
> >>
> >> I already have a software strategy tool which plots the QSO rate and
> >> Mult rate, per band and multi-band, for stations on the CQWW log site
> >> (and any other cabrillo file I import). Mix that with the live feed
> >> from your existing contest software, and you add another dimension to
> >> the world of contesting - making live strategy decisions based on past
> >> performance.
> >>
> >
> >> 73, Gerry W1V
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|