[CQ-Contest] ARRL says no to opening logs...

Pete Smith n4zr at contesting.com
Mon Aug 14 14:01:25 EDT 2006

Seems to me there is a fair difference between LOTW submission and opening a log, and between knowing you have a Q on 40 and actually fabricating a Q.  I think the key is in the words "ALL essential QSO elements" - there is no way to get time from most of the "see if you're in the log" sites that I have seen.  Also seems unlikely that Wayne would have promulgated a rule that would deter people from using LOTW.  

If a site actually disclosed all the essential elements, I still don't see how that lets me get in the log or claim a QSO unless I get a buddy to use my callsign and actually make the contact.  In that case, it makes no difference whether the info is disclosed or not.

Am I missing some elaborate cheating scenario here?

73, Pete N4ZR

At 01:16 PM 8/14/2006, k1ttt at arrl.net wrote:
>here is the new rule:
>5. The presentation in any public forum of logs or other representations
>of station operation showing details of station activity or other
>information from which all essential QSO elements (time, date, band, mode
>and callsign) for individual contacts can be derived creates a question as
>to the integrity of the claimed QSOs with that station during the period
>encompassed by the log. Presentation of such information in any public
>forum by the station operator, operators or associated parties is not
>allowed and may be considered sufficient reason to deny ARRL award credit
>for contacts with any station for which such presentations have been made.
>Persistent violation of this provision may result in disqualification from
>the DXCC program.
>this makes no sense at all...  How does confirming that you actually have
>a contact in the log before actually sending for a card, or submitting to
>LOTW threaten the qsl process??  doesn't the qso have to show in both logs
>(on lotw), or the manager has to find the requested qso in the log to get
>back a card anyway??  how does your knowing that you actually got logged
>affect that?
>Personally, this is one of the many reasons i refuse to bother with DXCC
>and many of the other awards programs that are controlled by crazy sets of
>rules that can be changed on the whim of some administrator.  Maybe i'll
>just publish all my logs and be done with it, no more dxcc for me or
>anyone trying to claim a contact with me!!
>> Sorry guys,
>> all your (our) contest logs which are fully published in the internet are
>> now no-go for DXCC... well, at least it means less QSL-work.
>> Or maybe removing sent report is enough?
>>    Membership Services Manager Wayne Mills, N7NG, informs: For a number
>>    of years, it has been accepted practice to post DXpedition QSO
>> informa-
>>    tion on a DXpedition Web site. Although this information is generally
>>    limited to callsign, band and mode, it has been useful in reducing
>> the
>>    number of duplicate contacts in the DXpedition log. Publishing
>> complete
>>    QSO information, or information from which full QSO information can
>> be
>>    derived, on the other hand, threatens the integrity of the QSLing
>>    process, and is unacceptable. There must be some information that the
>>    station claiming the QSO provides based solely on actually being
>> there
>>    when the QSO was made. If complete QSO information can be derived
>> from
>>    information based on the DXpedition log, the QSL manager's job can be
>>    much more difficult if busted calls are involved. To help minimize
>>    potential difficulties, therefore, the following restriction has been
>>    approved by the Programs and Services Committee, and added to the
>>    Accreditation Criteria, Section III.
>> 73, Timo OH1NOA
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>CQ-Contest mailing list
>CQ-Contest at contesting.com

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list