[CQ-Contest] KR2Q - RX1CQ

[Ron Notarius W3WN]

Bob:

Considering that the "erosion of trust" in an underlying reason, if not the
only one certainly a major one, behind the issue of Open Logs, I don't see
how the two issues can be separated.

I find your analysis on the erosion of trust (below) right on target.  

So if, for the sake of discussion, we agree with your comments... then IMHO
the "insanely jealous" will never be satisfied no matter what we do.

Therefore... why are we accommodating them further with Open Logs, and now
with this new demand to now open up the UBN reports?  Why is it even a
concern?

Because IMHO it won't stop here.  It will be something else, then something
else, then something else yet again.  And those of overtly suspicious
natures will not be satisfied.  

Regarding Open Logs themselves, I respectfully disagree, and continue to
disagree, with the reasoning that one's logs & log data are in and of
themselves a matter of public record and must be treated accordingly.  Now
maybe I have a different point of view on privacy issues.  Suffice to say, I
have had discussions with several of the HIPPA/HITECH compliance folks at
work, and my opinion remains unchanged.  But I don't wish to veer that far
off topic any further.

73

-----Original Message-----
From: w5ov at w5ov.com [mailto:w5ov at w5ov.com] 
Sent: Sunday, August 07, 2011 7:57 AM
To: Ron Notarius W3WN
Cc: cq-contest at contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] KR2Q - RX1CQ

Ron,

It might be helpful if you were to isolate the discussion of "erosion of
trust" from your claim that public logs or UBN reports are a "privacy
issue".

You have claimed the latter for a long time, but yet, I see no basis for
such a concern - which I believe is AB7E's point - where he essentially
says that if you were truly averse to making anything public, you would
not post in such a prolific manner. I have to agree with Dave, once again.

Erosion of trust: The reason that there is such distrust is that there are
those who are *insanely jealous* (I have chosen that description quite
carefully) of those who are running the top contests and have to malign
and accuse at every opportunity in an attempt to undermine the status quo
through web blogs and through willing electronic media who are looking to
report something sensational and exciting (I'm talking about independent
ham radio centered, web-based media here in the U.S., primarily). This
tactic is at play on the U.S. political landscape as well, so it's really
nothing new.

The truth of the matter is that there is nothing sinister going on with
those who run the major contests (at least in the U.S.), there is no
favoritism, and there is no unfair treatment of anyone's logs. In fact,
every opportunity is given for those who are caught cheating to admit what
they've done, do the right thing, and spare themselves the embarrassment
of a DQ or sanction (CQWW - Red Card / Yellow Card). Some fight to the
bitter end and will not admit that they have cheated, but the evidence is
overwhelming in most cases. If the evidence is not overwhelming - there
will likely be no DQ or sanction. To many who participate in the log
adjudication process, this very high criteria is frustrating at times,
because it is obvious that some level of cheating has gone on, but the
concern is to be certain and get it right. As a result, some may fall
through the cracks and may get away with it from time to time. This is the
cost of being very cautious to get it right.

My opinion remains that there is no privacy concern in anyone's log data
and anyone can perform any sort of analysis on that data they want. More
power to them. UBN's have no privacy issues either, but if one does not do
well, it might be embarrassing to have others see how poorly you do or how
careless you are in getting the exchange information correct, but that's
what it's all about, is it not? Comparing what we have done to others in
the  contest - right? If you don't want to expose yourself to this
comparison, either don't submit a log, or don't operate at all. It's your
choice.

73,

Bob W5OV