I'm still confused with this one.
I think a VAST majority of DXCC submissions come from a contest like the
CQWW!!
This publication of logs is one of the silliest threads yet. In this day of
computers, and great color printers, I can manufacture about any QSL I want,
short of the obvious really rare ones, and, even at that, I'd bet lunch that I
could slip 70-80% of phoney cards past ARRL field checkers. Like I said
before, on purpose, I printed off 4 EQSL cards, and asked 3 members of the
local
DX club ( all honor roll guys), which 2 were DXCC filed checkers, if they
saw anything wrong with submitting these cards. They all looked, and said all
the info was there, and looked fine. Then I told them they were printed from
EQSL. At that point, they changed their minds. Now, if I were not with
conscious, I could have submitted those cards, and got credit for them.
DXCC is a sham anymore, it is meaningless now days.
So, what is more of harm? Publishing a guys log, or, being able to fool
honor roll DXCC'ers ( and field checkers), with bogus cards?
Exactly what is the issue with seeing a published log? Online, or not, if my
call is not in that log, I don't get a card....And, if I were a loser, I
could still make up a card on my computer, with all of the info on it ( phoney
of course), and submit it, and with a 99% chance, I'd get credit.
I have well over 300 DXCC worked, and 4 band DXCC so far with low dipoles. I
have a paper that says I have 125 confirmed, and, that is stuck in the
drawer, maybe some day I can line a birdcage with it, but, I have satisfaction
of
knowing I am a member of the 300+ DXCC ham community.
73-Chuck KI9A
In a message dated 3/2/2008 12:24:40 A.M. Central Standard Time,
w4tv@subich.com writes:
> Not sure I get this comment: Just what, exactly, is CQ trying
> to "get away with"?
To violate the rules of DXCC.
> CQ does not answer to the ARRL. And I can think of no law or
> regulation, that CQ is obliged to obey, forbidding the
> publication of logs.
CQWW is a DX contest ... the first, and preeminent DX awards
program is DXCC. It certainly looks like CQ does not care
about anything beyond their little "world" at best or are
intentionally trying to damage DXCC at the worst.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sandy Taylor [mailto:ve4xt@mts.net]
> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2008 12:31 AM
> To: 'Joe Subich, W4TV'; KI9A@aol.com; cq-contest@contesting.com
> Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] Public access to logs
>
>
> That's exactly why all of my eQSL cards explicitly state "not
> valid for any award." It takes a little common sense rather
> that trying to "get away with something" like CQ is doing.
>
> Not sure I get this comment: Just what, exactly, is CQ trying
> to "get away
> with"?
>
> CQ does not answer to the ARRL. And I can think of no law or
> regulation,
> that CQ is obliged to obey, forbidding the publication of logs.
>
> 73, Kelly
> Ve4xt
>
>
**************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.
(http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-duffy/
2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|