[CQ-Contest] Public Logs

[Dick Green WC1M]

A good point, Joe.

I was intrigued that the DXCC blog specifically states that if they can be
sure published logs can't be changed, then it actually would be better to
publish them. I think this suggests a solution to the problem.

If contest sponsors don't publish logs until after the submission deadline,
and changes to logs are not allowed after the submission deadline (both of
which I believe are the case now), then DXCC can be assured that two
stations will not be able to claim credit for the same QSO -- i.e., the old
busted QSO trick won't work.

Sure, the QSL manager could change his/her copy of the log, but DXCC could
maintain a list of online logs for rare and semi-rare entities that are
published by contest sponsors, and check submitted QSLs against those logs.
Only QSLs matching the published contest log submission would be allowed. In
essence, the contest sponsor would be enforcing the rule that published logs
must not be changed. That's a natural part of the contest adjudication
process.

The blog also says that DXers would be peeved if the QSL manager didn't
correct a legitimately busted call. Well, one could take the position that a
busted call shouldn't count for DXCC -- just like it doesn't count for a
contest (and often generates a penalty as well.) Is it really a QSO if the
DX station didn't hear and log your call correctly? With near-real-time
posting of logs for DXpeditions becoming pretty common, people can check
whether their call was logged correctly or not.
 
73, Dick WC1M


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Subich, W4TV [mailto:w4tv at subich.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 7:04 PM
> To: 'Ward Silver'; 'CQ-Contest Reflector'
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Public Logs
> 
> 
> Ward,
> 
> DXCC rules prohibit publishing complete logs. In the end, the
> publishing of complete logs could result in disallowance of
> DXCC credit for "contest DXpedition" QSOs and ultimately the
> disqualification from DXCC for anyone who regularly participates
> in contests which make logs public.
> 
> see: http://www.arrl.org/blog/DXCC%20Dialog?ofst=25
> and: http://www.arrl.org/blog/DXCC%20Dialog?ofst=30
> 
> Of particular interest:
> 
>   > 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.
> 
> Please note the prohibition of disclosing the complete log info
> by even "associated parties."  I would certainly include contest
> sponsors as "associated parties."  It's up to those sponsors to
> properly analyze their logs for potential rules violations but that
> analysis process MUST NOT include requiring the participants to
> violate the rules of the DXCC program (or any other program) by
> making the entire log public.
> 
> Any contest sponsor who makes complete logs public should be
> censured by the entire amateur community.
> 
> 73,
> 
>    ... Joe, W4TV
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
> > [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ward Silver
> > Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2007 4:44 PM
> > To: CQ-Contest Reflector
> > Subject: [CQ-Contest] Public Logs
> >
> >
> > > Not on your life!  My log is my log - I make it available to the
> > > contest sponsor for checking as a condition of entry but it is NOT
> > > public and should never be made public.  There is no reason for it
> > > to be made public.
> >
> > You may choose not to share the details of your station or
> > your methods of
> > operation that can not be deduced from a public record of
> > your QSO's. But
> > all of the contacts were completely public. When it comes to
> > activities
> > conducted over the airwaves of Amateur Radio, the concept of
> > "private" ends
> > at the antenna.  This is by definition - both of physics and
> > of regulation -
> > and has nothing to do with what is in your submitted log.
> >
> > The day is rapidly approaching when any station's activities
> > on the air will
> > be trackable in real-time and recorded for posterity.  All it
> > takes is a few
> > receivers sprinkled around the globe with software to decode
> > the various
> > transmissions.  Admittedly, unraveling a pileup may take a
> > little longer,
> > but technology is moving quickly.  With enough submitted QSO's, I
> can
> > reconstruct your log whether you submit one or not. This is
> > not a good hobby
> > for anyone that isn't comfortable being visible.
> >
> > The very concept of a "private log" of anything involving a radio
> > transmission is on its last legs.
> >
> > 73, Ward N0AX
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
> >
>