How about results on CDROM?
wmhein at aol.com
wmhein at aol.com
Sun Feb 13 10:41:20 EST 1994
Someone on the reflector asked how much it would cost to put contest results
on CD-ROM.
I own a record company (Restless Records). Most of our sales are on compact
disc (the vinyl album is dead and the analog audio cassette "smells bad").
CD and CD-ROM use the exact same manufacturing techniques.
Market price for CD replication in volume these days is around 79 cents for
the disc, plastic jewel case and shrink wrap drop shipped in bulk anywhere in
the USA. The printed end card and booklet run about another 20 cents each.
CD-ROM mastering is a one-time $750 expense, regardless of the size of
manufacturing run.
It would seem feasible to put HUGE amounts of contest log data on a CD-ROM
for modest cost.
Bill AA6TT
wmhein at aol.com
>From Danny Eskenazi <0005720561 at mcimail.com> Sun Feb 13 18:48:00 1994
From: Danny Eskenazi <0005720561 at mcimail.com> (Danny Eskenazi)
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 94 13:48 EST
Subject: Sprint
Message-ID: <40940213184804/0005720561PK3EM at mcimail.com>
Did you say MARGINAL condx? How about HORRIBLE!!!! Once again Aurora RULES.
20 never really opened to NE. Loud CO/NM at start...bad sign. 20 died early.
40 a total wipeout. Loud CO/NM..east coast just a whisper. Called W9s with
KW..not even a "QRZ?". Just able to work the beams guys. 40 useless in 30 min.
80..only W1FEA, K9RS copyable..whispers from W9/8s. Wanted to quit early..
nothing to do for last 2 hours. Bothered locals etc..Couldnt quit, had fellow
LUNATICS TEAM to support.(Best named team this time!!) Beat W7WA by 1 qso,felt
good til found out he was off air for 30 min, AND answered door to neighbors.
259/49 here K7SS. ciao
>From MSgt Bob Smith/SCSMH <smithb at GF-WAN.af.mil> Sun Feb 13 18:52:34 1994
From: MSgt Bob Smith/SCSMH <smithb at GF-WAN.af.mil> (MSgt Bob Smith/SCSMH)
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 94 12:52:34 CST
Subject: Sprint Results
Message-ID: <9402131852.AA08551 at GF-WAN.af.mil>
Well, one team member defected to 6y5 with the xyl, and I heard
something about a no radio pact. Hope the holiday was warm.
band qso's
80 26 \
40 27 / 80 + 40 = 20?!?
20 53
---
106 x 33 mutls = 3,498
This was my third and worst effort, conditions were miserable. I'm
wondering if the 100W class should get QSO credit for calling alligators
three times without response. Let's see - ARRL CW is next.
73 de Bob ND1H - smithb at gf-wan.af.mil
>From Peter Jennings <pjenning at comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> Sun Feb 13 18:01:17 1994
From: Peter Jennings <pjenning at comix.santa-cruz.ca.us> (Peter Jennings)
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 94 10:01:17 PST
Subject: How about results on CDROM?
Message-ID: <9402131001.aa19351 at comix.Santa-Cruz.Ca.US>
> I would be willing to pay $20 or $30 for a CD containing all the logs
> submitted to, say, Sweepstakes, CQWW, ARRL DX, etc. I haven't been around
> the prices in the last few years (help me out somebody?)
Mastering costs for 1000 copies is around $2-3 a copy.
> How many of you out there have CDROM drives on your computers? Probably
> even less than the number that run Windows...and I know that's the minority
Lots. Total sales of the various CDRom callsign databases now exceeds
10,000 per year. [ Friends don't let friends do Windows! ]
I think it's a fantastic idea. I would pay $50 for a cumulation of CQWW
logs over several years. The possibility for propagation and operating
style analysis makes my mouth water.
> The decision of the judges would be final!
Yes. Although it will be easy for anyone with sufficient time and
motivation (just barely missed the box, second by a whisker) to find
broken calls, uncounted dupes, etc., it would not be fair.
The analogy to the instant replay is correct.
However, with the logs out there for every software wizard to play with,
new tools for analysis would be generated which could then be applied by
the judges to the next contest to make the scoring more accurate.
Peter
(O O)
+----------------------------oOO==(_)==OOo------------------------------------+
| Peter Jennings AB6WM peterj at netcom.com |
| ab6wm at comix.santa-cruz.ca.us O Voice/FAX: 1 408 336-3503 |
| Fidonet:1:216/506 o P O Box 336 |
| 72470.3171 at compuserve.com . Ben Lomond CA 95005 USA |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
>From slay at netcom.com (Sandy Lynch) Sun Feb 13 19:04:16 1994
From: slay at netcom.com (Sandy Lynch) (Sandy Lynch)
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 11:04:16 -0800 (PST)
Subject: How about results on CDROM?
Message-ID: <199402131904.LAA08154 at netcom9.netcom.com>
> Someone on the reflector asked how much it would cost to put contest results
> on CD-ROM.
>
> Market price for CD replication in volume these days is around 79 cents for
> the disc, plastic jewel case and shrink wrap drop shipped in bulk anywhere in
> the USA. The printed end card and booklet run about another 20 cents each.
> CD-ROM mastering is a one-time $750 expense, regardless of the size of
> manufacturing run.
>
> It would seem feasible to put HUGE amounts of contest log data on a CD-ROM
> for modest cost.
>
This topic has been very interesting and illuminating. Although
perhaps the majority of hams worldwide still enjoy the exchange of
QSL cards, the effort to do so by Contesters is proving to be an
overwhelming burden in terms of both time and resources. DXers
are also faced with the large expense involved in collecting QSLs
for multi-band awards (5BDXCC, 5BWAZ, etc).
We also know that in earlier times, the ARRL had set a precedent
by accepting as *QSO confirmation* log entries from DX stations
participating in their contests in lieu of QSLs. This practice
was abandoned some time ago, and IMHO, I doubt it will come back.
The ARRL is already being hammered by many for spending too much
treasure and resources (and page space in QST) on the DXCC program
and contests. Chances are, they wonÕt look obligingly upon taking
on the chores of setting up another database (unless, it MORE than
pays for itself).
So, we now know from the valuable input on this reflector that it
should be technically feasible to store the electronic logs of major
contest operations for a relatively modest sum. However, we still
have to find a way to actually collect this data in bulk, redistribute
the requested data/confirmations to the user/market and finally to
insure that such confirmations are accepted as *valid* by the ARRL/CQ,
etc for various awards.
This sounds like a small business/entrepreneurial opportunity for
someone with a reasonably well configured PC and printer. Why not have
this done by a third party service provider rather than ARRL et al?
Logs could be forwarded directly and/or the service provider(s)
could make competitive *bids* to the ARRL, CQ, etc. to acquire the
originals and/or copies of the electronic/disk based submissions from
contest participants. AND, the big guns who do not want to send out
mountains of QSLs themselves could *pay* to have their own logs handled
by the service provider (assuming other hams would accept a print-out
of log confirmations - a very big IF).
Requests for confirmations could be handled on a fee basis; perhaps
only 10-20 cents per DX QSO or sliding scale based on volume. US QSOs
could be confirmed for 2-3 cents each, or some nominal fee. A *user*
could send a request for all QSO confirmations in the database - with
a printout showing vital info. The info could be sorted in anyway the
user requests (for a fee, of course); by country, prefix; formatted
for specific awards, etc. This could substantially reduce the cost
of chasing those multi-band awards, WPX, etc.
The ARRL/CQ (or others) could then on occasion verify the accuracy of
the service providerÕs activities by submitting requests for
confirmations of bogus QSOs. Perhaps a performance *bond* should be put
up by the service provider.
It seems to me that we have had many good ideas presented here on the
reflector, but it would be welcome to see it move from an intellectual
discussion to an action plan. It takes someone with some vision and
leadership to make it happen. Does anybody want to pick up the ball
and run with it?
Cheers de Sandy WA6BXH/7J1ABV slay at netcom.com
>From H. Ward Silver" <hwardsil at seattleu.edu Sun Feb 13 20:02:22 1994
From: H. Ward Silver" <hwardsil at seattleu.edu (H. Ward Silver)
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 12:02:22 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Sprint score
Message-ID: <Pine.3.07.9402131222.A26648-a100000 at bach>
N0AX eked out 149 x 39 for a mighty 5811 points, low power. Cdx were ugly up
here in the NW. Looks like both K7SS and W7WA are going to miss out on the
Top Ten, with WA dropping out for the first time since ???. After 0300 we
could hear nada east of the Mississippi on any band, for example. Ick!
__ /| | H. Ward Silver, N0AX | "Grub first, then ethics."
\'o.O' CQ | 206 463-2833 | Berthold Brecht
=(___)= 20, | hwardsil at seattleu.edu | "Rate first, then mults."
U PBBBT! | N0AX @N7DUO.#WWA.NA | Larson E. Rapp
>From rklein at lobo.rmh.pr1.k12.co.us (Ronald D. Klein) Sun Feb 13 23:33:41 1994
From: rklein at lobo.rmh.pr1.k12.co.us (Ronald D. Klein) (Ronald D. Klein)
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 94 16:33:41 MST
Subject: E-Mail adressdress for sprint logs??
Message-ID: <9402132333.AA97099 at lobo.rmh.pr1.k12.co.us>
What is the e-mail address to be used for submittal of Sprint logs?
Ron - W0OSK
>From XMSJ29A at prodigy.com (MR JAMES A WHITE) Mon Feb 14 01:33:29 1994
From: XMSJ29A at prodigy.com (MR JAMES A WHITE) (MR JAMES A WHITE)
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 20:33:29 EST
Subject: Databases versus QSLs and Overseers
Message-ID: <013.00335420.XMSJ29A at prodigy.com>
RE the barrage of queries as to whether a third party could maintain a
digital database of contest QSOs and its possible usage for DXCC confirmations.
Of course the league dropped DX Competition logs as a source for QSO
verification because of its cost. If all hams will some day be submitting
their logs on disc, this would be time to reconsider re-vamping this
policy. The DXCC aides (or is that aids) used to have to go upstairs into
the deepest darkest parts of the ARRL storage rooms to find cardboard
filing boxes of logs from contest years gone by....dig for the DX stations'
logs.....then look up the QSO-which may not have been at the time the DXCC
applicant had listed (due to errors on either or both ends)....those I knew
who used to do that job were forgiving when a Q wasn't at the exact time
specified, they would look around the given log page, maybe forward an
hour/backward an hour. Today having a computer search a file (log) for a
QSO would be "a snap" relatively speaking.
So...we agree that everyone should submit their log electronically, be it
on a disc or through the ether or twisted pair or whatever....this way its
no problem man "your in the disk".
Now what...theoretically we can eliminate a whole lot of card checking
since we will have the logs of both ends available to the DXCC processor in
Newington, and he can have the computer due a search and pounce on their
logs. The ARRL board would probably like this, it would require very little
man power and would produce viable results.
What's missing? The same thing that is missing when cards are field
checked. The same thing that gives an award value as opposed to empty
awards which nobody ever mentions on the face of their QSL.
CREDIBILITY....WA6BXH-the third party idea is stinko.
For about 25 years I know the DXCC award was handled in a manor which made
it something of value to its holder. Its administration was fair. No matter
who you were, you got the same treatment when it came to your DXCC. You
were respected by other DXCC award holders as well because they knew of
what you had endured and they could relate-DXCC bond if you will.
Holding DXCC today doesn't mean what it did as compared to say the
sixties...there are so many people in at number one on the honor role now
that achieving honor role status is like getting the first 100 used to be,
and being on top of the honor role is like making the honor role used to
be. Times have changed, nothing else, I accept it.
DXing and DXCC are a lot different than they used to be not to mention
contesting-have you seen the multiplier totals the multi-multi stations
have anymore...if digital qso confirmation may come in the future so may
digital 5 band DXCC awards...in the future it may be I confirmed them all
the HARD WAY will mean from digital log submissions!
So what, through DXing in the toilet? Hell no. This is about digital logs
and their availability to the ham community (that is why I have sent this
to the CQ Contest Reflector, Trey) in the future.
It is agreed, having access to everyone elses logs would be fascinating-I
wouldn't get any sleep at all then-just think what you could learn from
K1AR's DX logs...how many times would you be saying I had no idea that a
path existed in that direction at that time of day! Would this make us
better contesters? Probably-our propagation learning curve would sure be a
faster one. What else would it do-take some of the thrill out of finding
this stuff out on the fly by switching to a "wrong band" and having our jaw
hit the operating table when we found that YB0? Yes.
So, we can be all knowing by studying the logs of all entrants, including
the winners and the band sentinel multi-multis. Take this knowledge and
plug it into our operating schedule making technique OR:
go single op assisted and simply watch the packett cluster.
Conclusion. Keep your mouth shut and your ears open and with persistence
you will learn the many secrets of propagation. Want to do it quicker? Ask
another local contester if you can borrow his logs...provided you return
them I am sure he will be obliging. You are now doing a very important part
of hamming-log bonding with another contester. How can you repay him for
the knowledge you gained from his logs-offer to help with antenna work or
something "in kind".
If we were all able to have an operating bible at our fingertips as easily
as CD-ROM results including all log submissions of the 1993 ARRL contest
year we might all die of an overdose of data. What a way to go-kinda like
dying in the saddle.
It would also take away from some of the fun.
I love being a unique because I found an opening that others did not...that
response to your CQ by somecountry totally unexpected is perhaps the
biggest rush in a DX contest. It could be the multiplier that moves you up
a notch in the results. It is the element of chance that all contesters
live for...if it was all point your beams this way from xxxx zulu to yyyy
zulu, then turn them to xyz degrees until zzzz zulu we would all bore of
contesting and move on to other exciting sports like collecting plates by
the Franklin Mint....
I am opposed to the dissemination of contest results which include entrants
logs. I will continue to put faith in the parties administering the
contests-despite my being let down in the past. I also wish to keep my job
and marriage sound-if I could have access to all those logs I would
undoubtedly never leave the seat in front of the PC.......long path on
fifteen meters, when!!!!!!!................VU on 40 when ??????????????? ........
Lets not get too carried away with our computers, we may end up like those
computer geeks I saw at the Miami Convention-one guy in the lunch line in
front of me was telling another about how he was an advanced and hadn't
been on the air in five years, by the way had he tried that new DOS 6.1?
WHOA....let's be the ones who keep working people...the others will forget
how pretty soon!
DX IS and CONTESTING LIVES.......KB ARRL DX!
73
Jim, K1ZX
>From rmarosko at bcm.tmc.edu (Ronald J. Marosko) Mon Feb 14 02:21:55 1994
From: rmarosko at bcm.tmc.edu (Ronald J. Marosko) (Ronald J. Marosko)
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 20:21:55 CST
Subject: Sprint result snatched from Cluster
Message-ID: <199402140221.UAA28006 at bcm.tmc.edu>
Snatched from the local PacketCluster...
N5RP - 256 q x 45 m = 11,520
Team: Texas DX Society
>From slay at netcom.com (Sandy Lynch) Mon Feb 14 06:38:02 1994
From: slay at netcom.com (Sandy Lynch) (Sandy Lynch)
Date: Sun, 13 Feb 1994 22:38:02 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Databases versus QSLs and Overseers
Message-ID: <199402140638.WAA22421 at mail.netcom.com>
----------------
> RE the barrage of queries as to whether a third party could maintain
> a digital database of contest QSOs and its possible usage for DXCC
> confirmations.
MR JAMES A WHITE, K1ZX says:
> CREDIBILITY....WA6BXH-the third party idea is stinko.
I do not mind that you believe the idea to be *stinko* - it may well be;
but I am not quite sure what CREDIBILITY has to do with the idea?
What exactly is NOT credible about it?
To be fair - let me put that statement back in its original context:
> What's missing? The same thing that is missing when cards are field
> checked. The same thing that gives an award value as opposed to empty
> awards which nobody ever mentions on the face of their QSL.
> CREDIBILITY....WA6BXH-the third party idea is stinko.
> For about 25 years I know the DXCC award was handled in a manor which
> made it something of value to its holder. Its administration was fair.
> No matter who you were, you got the same treatment when it came to
> your DXCC. You were respected by other DXCC award holders as well
> because they knew of what you had endured and they could relate-DXCC
> bond if you will.
So, what is it about the 3rd Party idea that lacks CREDIBILITY??? Did
you forget to mention WHY you think it lacks credibility and just move
on in your tome or what?
Actually, I agree with many of the things you stated; I too have been
a DXer for a long time (since mid-60s); I fear you may have exaggerated
just a teensy bit when you say that making DXCC is as easy today as
making Honor Roll was back then. That is not a very credible statement
- but then, you are probably not uncomfortable making such statements
as I would be. Ah, that verged on a flame - my apologies.
I think you missed the point. The topic started out as a discussion of
the expense and time-consuming activity of QSLing - and more specifically
- QSLing for Contest operations. I merely suggested a way of making it
more economical - not as a way to eliminate QSLs. To be frank, I would
not mind if they dropped the requirement for QSLs for major awards
altogether. What value does an award have to the holder who did not
earn it? If the holder wants to live a lie, what the heck? I would feel
more pity than anger. Why waste the time worrying about what others may
or may not be doing ethically? I am more concerned about my own *real*
accomplishments.
Lastly, I really do not see a *market* for a CD-ROM database of logs
from past contests, except perhaps for maybe the very, very few
who want to analyze the logs. Even for that, to gain much insight,
you would really have to analzye the data of a station with similiar
capabilities and geographic location. Arrrrgggggghhhhhhhh - that is
worse than reading stock quotes that are a year or two old. Ah, but
then I am, unfortunately, not in the Top Ten (yet). ;-)
Cheers de Sandy WA6BXH/7J1ABV slay at netcom.com
>From forg at cent.gud.siemens.co.at (Forthuber Gerald) Mon Feb 14 08:36:10 1994
From: forg at cent.gud.siemens.co.at (Forthuber Gerald) (Forthuber Gerald)
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 94 09:36:10 +0100
Subject: No subject
Message-ID: <9402140836.AA20288 at cent.gud.siemens-austria>
QUERY
QUIT
***********************************************************************
Gerald Forthuber e-mail: forg at cent.gud.siemens.co.at
Siemens AG Austria phone: (+43-1) 601 71 - 6326
Gudrunstrasse 11 FAX: (+43-1) 601 71 - 6399
A-1100 Wien
***********************************************************************
>From slay at netcom.com (Sandy Lynch) Mon Feb 14 08:37:52 1994
From: slay at netcom.com (Sandy Lynch) (Sandy Lynch)
Date: Mon, 14 Feb 1994 00:37:52 -0800 (PST)
Subject: Ooops! Got it backwards
Message-ID: <199402140837.AAA03726 at mail.netcom.com>
Apologies to Jim K1ZX, - in my rebuttal to his message, I got
the following bass-ackwards: ;->
> Actually, I agree with many of the things you stated;...........
> (except)...... that making DXCC is as easy today as making Honor Roll
> was back then.
Obviously, I got that reversed. Hope it does not cause any grief.
Threes de sandy
WA6BXH/7J1ABV slay at netcom.com
PS: glad to see Prodigy has a gateway to Internet at last.
More information about the CQ-Contest
mailing list