[CQ-Contest] Public access to logs

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

> Be all this as it may, is the debate not pointless until ARRL
> weighs in on whether CQ publishing WW logs invalidates WW 
> contacts for DXCC credit? And, shouldn't the complaints be 
> directed toward CQ, with the ultimate protest of voting with 
> your feet being the main weapon? Or maybe it's ARRL that 
> needs to be flexible. Or perhaps both organizations should be 
> chided for not playing well together.
> 
> If you don't feel strongly enough about this to employ the
> ultimate protest, why are we even having this discussion?

I have done just that ... in addition to KOHB's action to withhold 
logs in CQ sponsored contests, I have notified CQ of my intention 
to withhold support for the magazine in other ways until this policy 
is changed.  I further intend to urge others in my position to do 
the same.  

The contest committees can still provide for outside scrutiny 
of the logs by removing identifying information (e.g., name, 
address, e-mail address, etc.) from the Cabrillo header and 
encrypting the call.  With that the public log no longer violates 
section III, paragraph 5 of the DXCC rules but still provides raw 
data for those who wish to do statistical analysis.  The committees 
can maintain a cross reference between encrypted and real calls for 
their own use in case outside analysis (if anyone bothers) were to 
produce a credible charge of cheating. 

If individuals outside the committee are only interested in 
statistical analysis, logs with all individually identifying 
information removed are sufficient for that purpose.  There 
is no legitimate purpose for anyone outside the sponsoring 
organization to study the log of a particular station. 





> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sandy Taylor [mailto:ve4xt at mts.net]
> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2008 10:02 AM
> To: 'Joe Subich, W4TV'; KI9A at aol.com; cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] Public access to logs
> 
> 
> So because one organization, who has control over nobody but
> those who enter its award program, decides on one rule, the 
> rest of amateur radio must bend to its will?
> 
> I doubt even the ARRL would agree with that idea.
> 
> It's interesting that some would ascribe sinister motives to
> CQ's decision.
> 
> CQ is not violating the rules of DXCC because CQ is not
> entering the DXCC program. Only those who submit application 
> to the DXCC program are bound by DXCC rules.
> 
> Perhaps CQ sees itself in competition with the ARRL and does
> not wish its contests to be used to further ARRL awards? We 
> certainly understand why Verizon doesn't give free phones to 
> AT&T customers, don't we?
> 
> Be all this as it may, is the debate not pointless until ARRL
> weighs in on whether CQ publishing WW logs invalidates WW 
> contacts for DXCC credit? And, shouldn't the complaints be 
> directed toward CQ, with the ultimate protest of voting with 
> your feet being the main weapon? Or maybe it's ARRL that 
> needs to be flexible. Or perhaps both organizations should be 
> chided for not playing well together.
> 
> If you don't feel strongly enough about this to employ the
> ultimate protest, why are we even having this discussion?
> 
> 73, Kelly
> Ve4xt
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Subich, W4TV [mailto:w4tv at subich.com]
> Sent: March-02-08 12:24 AM
> To: 'Sandy Taylor'; KI9A at aol.com; cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] Public access to logs
> 
> 
> > 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 at mts.net]
> > Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2008 12:31 AM
> > To: 'Joe Subich, W4TV'; KI9A at aol.com; cq-contest at 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
> > 
> >