[CQ-Contest] Public access to logs

Tue Mar 4 08:47:58 EST 2008

Ya know, investigative reporters and the government tests the validity and 
accuracy of programs all the time.  TSA runs fake and real weapons through 
the screener checkpoints to see if the screeners will catch them.  Computer 
manufacturers will run a bad computer through the system to see if the QA 
folks will catch it.  Does this mean that they're being fraudulent?  No, 
they're testing the system to see if the measures put in place to catch 
unwanted items actually catch them.

Ever heard of the term "whistleblower"?

KI9A basically tested the system with a card that he knew was "bad" and 
wanted to see if the checker(s) would catch it.  Clearly they're not able to 
initially detect certain cards.  Does that make KI9A a perpetrator of fraud? 
Only if he knowingly sought to do it with the intent of receiving credit for 
the cards.  The fact that he told them about the cards demonstrates that it 
was part of a test.

73 Rich NN3W

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw at verizon.net>
To: "CQ Contest Reflector" <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, March 03, 2008 6:21 AM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Public access to logs

> Chuck,
>
> You're still confused?  OK. Let's try it this way.
>
> W3WH (who doesn't live that far from me) worked VP6DX on 12 meters.  (Not 
> a
> contest QSO, incidently!)  I didn't.
>
> With an open log, it is child's play for me, should I have been so 
> inclined
> (and I'm not), to look up the exact time of the QSO and claim that they
> actually worked me.  Further, with an open log, I can even look up 
> adjoining
> QSO's to "prove" that it was actually me.
>
> Now multiply that a couple of hundred times for people who just "have" to
> show that they were in the log on a particular band or band/mode.
>
> THAT is why the ARRL DXCC program is against open logs.
>
> That you can print an "e-Card" and slip it past the field checkers is 
> beside
> the point.  If you really wanted to, you could make up a card from scratch
> these days and try the same thing.  That says more about your integrity, 
> to
> even try this, than I care to get into.  But because you could pull a
> fraudulent action like this -- and by your own admission have done so at
> least four times, even if just to "prove a point" -- does not make the
> entire program a sham.
>
> And because you think the entire program is a sham, you have the right to
> try to tear it down or destroy it for the rest of us?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com]On Behalf Of KI9A at aol.com
> Sent: Sunday, March 02, 2008 9:42 AM
> To: w4tv at subich.com; cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Public access to logs
>
>
> I'm still confused with this one.
>
> I think a VAST majority of DXCC submissions come from a contest like the
> CQWW!!
>
> This publication of logs is one of the silliest threads yet. In this day 
> of
> computers, and great color printers, I can manufacture about any QSL I 
> want,
> short of the obvious really rare ones, and, even at that, I'd bet lunch 
> that
> I
> could slip 70-80% of phoney cards past ARRL field checkers.  Like I said
> before, on purpose, I printed off 4 EQSL cards, and asked 3 members of the
> local
> DX club ( all honor roll guys), which 2 were DXCC filed checkers, if they
> saw  anything wrong with submitting these cards. They all looked, and said
> all
> the  info was there, and looked fine. Then I told them they were printed
> from
> EQSL.  At that point, they changed their minds. Now, if I were not with
> conscious, I  could have submitted those cards, and got credit for them.
>
> DXCC is a sham anymore, it is meaningless now days.
>
> So, what is more of harm? Publishing a guys log, or, being able to fool
> honor roll DXCC'ers ( and field checkers), with bogus cards?
>
> Exactly what is the issue with seeing a published log? Online, or not,  if
> my
> call is not in that log, I don't get a card....And, if I were a  loser, I
> could still make up a card on my computer, with all of the info on it (
> phoney
> of course), and submit it, and with a 99% chance, I'd get  credit.
>
> I have well over 300 DXCC worked, and 4 band DXCC so far with low dipoles.
> I
> have a paper that says I have 125 confirmed, and, that is stuck in the
> drawer,  maybe some day I can line a birdcage with it, but, I have
> satisfaction of
> knowing I am a member of the 300+ DXCC ham community.
>
> 73-Chuck KI9A
>
>
> In a message dated 3/2/2008 12:24:40 A.M. Central Standard Time,
> w4tv at subich.com writes:
>
>
>>  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
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> **************Ideas to please picky eaters. Watch video on AOL Living.
> (http://living.aol.com/video/how-to-please-your-picky-eater/rachel-campos-du
> ffy/
> 2050827?NCID=aolcmp00300000002598)
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest 