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

[Frank Hurlbut KL7FH]

Can we start a LOTW reflector and move on foks?
Geez...
73
Frank KL7FH
432 EME
16X12 ele polarity rotation
FT-847 700 Watts
preamp KA0RYT .18db NF

http://www.qsl.net/kl7fh
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ron Notarius" <wn3vaw at verizon.net>
To: "CQ Contest Reflector" <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 6:54 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] L.O.T.W.


> OK Bill.  We got the message.  You don't like the LOTW interface.  No 
> amount
> of discussion is going to sway you as to why it is the way it is, or
> persuade you otherwise, ad infinitum, ad nauseum.  Enough already.
>
> FWIW, I understood Wayne's answer perfectly.
>
> Also FWIW, I won't argue that the LOTW interface can be improved.  It can
> be.  It should be.  And it will be.  Let us not forget that this is merely
> the first iteration of what will be a very long term system.  C'mon, so 
> they
> didn't hit a home run and achieve perfection for everyone the very first
> time.  Give them a chance -- and some positive feedback wouldn't hurt,
> either!
>
> Sheesh.
>
> 73
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2005 10:05:20 -0700
>> From: Bill Turner <dezrat1242 at ispwest.com>
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] L.O.T.W.
>> To: "Mills, Wayne  N7NG" <N7NG at arrl.org>
>> Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
>>
>> At 04:53 AM 7/27/2005, Mills, Wayne  N7NG wrote:
>> >Banks would love to use PKI (or similar technology) because their own
>> >security stinks and they know it. They don't use it because the general
>> >public can't handle it. We think hams can.
>> >
>> >Comparing banks and LoTW is comparing apples and oranges, however.
>> >Simplifications are possible, but until the "industry" comes up with a
>> >transparent alternative, digital signatures are not on the table.  When
>> >you understand the differences, we can talk.
>> >
>> >73,  Wayne Mills, N7NG/1, Manager
>> >        Membership Services Department
>>
>> _________________________________________________
>>
>> This is a classic response from an organization that has made a mistake
> and
>> won't admit it. The heels are dug in and no amount of reason will change
>> their minds. I've seen it before many times. I'm sorry the ARRL is taking
>> that same road, but I'm not really surprised. The ARRL is about as
>> hidebound a bureaucracy as you will ever see.
>>
>> It was earlier postulated that someone at the ARRL DX desk had been 
>> burned
>> by fake QSL cards at some time and as a result, has gone overboard with
>> security. I suspect that is exactly what has happened. They are scared of
>> another fiasco causing them to be disgraced and possibly lose their jobs.
>> As a result, we all suffer.
>>
>> If you would like LoTW to be simplified and yet remain secure, please
> write
>> your Division Director. Those folks are elected, unlike the appointed
> staff
>> at ARRL, and they WILL listen to reason.
>>
>> For now, it looks like we're stuck, guys.
>>
>> Bill, W6WRT
>>
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>