[CQ-Contest] ARRL rule...the introduction (aka CONTEXT)

[Joe Subich, W4TV]

> I got into a real debate with Wayne not long before he left 
> the League about pre-emptive QSLing - relying on my log to QSL 
> everyone I thought I'd worked, without waiting for a card from 
> them.  Eventually, he allowed as how what was OK for an N4 would 
> not be for a DXpedition to Kosovo.  Yet increasingly, DXpeditions 
> and individual travelers are uploading their entire logs to LOTW.

There is a big difference between pre-emptive QSLing (sending a 
physical card) to every station you work in a contest and a 
DXpedition uploading logs to Logbook of the World.   With the 
cards, the call you have "busted" (e.g., W4ZR vs. N4ZR) receives 
a card that can be used for an award he potentially did not 
earn.  With Logbook of the World - since it is "double blind" 
- W4ZR would need to "guess" that a QSO with N4ZR was busted 
at a specific time, specific band and specific mode.  The chance  
of a confirmation for a busted QSO on Logbook of the World is 
vanishingly small.  

However, public logs significantly increase the chance of 
confirming the busted call ... I could literally comb the logs 
of DX stations looking for contacts with W?TV, N4TV, K4TV ... 
on SSB I could extend that to W?TB, maybe even W?TP or any 
number of phonetically similar calls.  On CW, with log data 
it would be easy to argue that W3TV, W4TU, W4NU, W4DA, etc. 
were really "my" QSO that had been busted.  In all cases, 
who can really argue that the call was not busted?  

> Frankly, I think Wayne was way out on the far end of the 
> bell-shaped curve in his approach to the sanctity of DXCC 
> as well as, for that matter, the security of LOTW.  

I think Bob White would be spinning in his grave with lack 
of concern - and apparent disdain - many here are expressing 
to the security and sanctity of DXCC.  The lack of concern for 
the standards 60 plus years (Don Miller not withstanding) is 
appalling. 

73, 

   ... Joe, W4TV 
 


> -----Original Message-----
> From: cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com 
> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Pete Smith
> Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 2:24 PM
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] ARRL rule...the introduction (aka CONTEXT)
> 
> 
> I guess maybe I've missed something here.  Let's assume that 
> W4ZR works 
> someone in CQWWCW that I need for DXCC.  They publish the 
> log, and I write 
> to the QSL manager and claim that it was me, not that W4 guy. 
>  I get a QSL, 
> and then W4ZR writes to the same manager and asks for a QSL.  
> I am SO busted...
> 
> Wouldn't the risk of this happening be enough to deter most 
> sane people?
> 
> I got into a real debate with Wayne not long before he left 
> the League 
> about pre-emptive QSLing - relying on my log to QSL everyone 
> I thought I'd 
> worked, without waiting for a card from them.  Eventually, he 
> allowed as 
> how what was OK for an N4 would not be for a DXpedition to 
> Kosovo.  Yet 
> increasingly, DXpeditions and individual travelers are 
> uploading their 
> entire logs to LOTW.  Frankly, I think Wayne was way out on 
> the far end of 
> the bell-shaped curve in his approach to the sanctity of DXCC 
> as well as, 
> for that matter, the security of LOTW.
> 
> 73, Pete N4ZR
> 
>    At 10:46 AM 3/6/2008, VR2BrettGraham wrote:
> >KR2Q shared with us http://www.arrl.org/arrlletter/06/0818/
> >
> >If I'm not mistaken, 2006-08-16 would have been some
> >time before CQ WW published the logs of every single
> >entrant from 2006.  Like a little over a year.
> >
> >According to http://www.arrl.org/?artid=7109 N7NG
> >left the ARRL as of 2007-01-16.  This is a bit more than
> >a half a year before CQ WW first published logs.
> >
> >Both the rule change & whatever N7NG might have said
> >were well before the publishing of the logs of every single 
> entrant of 
> >the most popular radiosporting event.
> >
> >The context in which the rule change was made was
> >_not_ the publishing of so many logs - including quite a
> >few that folks might want to claim credit for contacting -
> >but some far fewer number (something like several
> >thousandths) of DXpedition logs that went beyond what
> >was necessary for one to establish that they were in the
> >log for a given band/mode.
> >
> >And unless N7NG was asked specifically about the
> >publishing of every single log submitted for CQ WW,
> >then his answer appears to be have taken quite some
> >ways out of context.
> >
> >73, ex-VR2BrettGraham/p.
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >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