[CQ-Contest] Two points for intra-NA QSOs in CQWW?

Sun Mar 10 15:50:41 EDT 2013

I refused to operate the contest sponsored by Romeo, which included last 
4 of the SSN + mother's maiden name in the exchange. :-)
Barry W2UP

On 3/10/2013 13:16, Bob Naumann wrote:
> Ron,
>
> I guess we have gone over this before, but I still don't see any personal
> information being requested or required in any contest logs.
>
> If you don't want your secondary address or station location published,
> don't put it in the log file. There is no requirement to do so.
>
> As far as station location is concerned, I think the ARRL Section is about
> as close as you have to get to giving out that information.
>
> There's no requirement for you to provide your actual station address in the
> Cabrillo file -  it's your mailing address that is asked for, and this is so
> the sponsor can send you a certificate.
>
> It is not to locate your station or where you live or where you operate
> from. If you don't want to provide it, don't.
>
> You could put "See QRZ.com for address information" or leave it out.  No log
> would be rejected for this.
>
> I have never seen a telephone number requested.  I would not provide one
> either. What purpose would it serve?
>
> If you don't want, don't provide your email in your Cabrillo file. There is
> no hard requirement to provide it. Many don't.
>
> I have never seen a birth date requested - even in the All-Asia contest
> where your age is your exchange, there is no requirement to divulge your
> birthdate.
>
> Does it bother me that contest log data that has no personal information in
> it is used for purposes related to the contest or contest
> operation/analysis? No.
>
> In principle, I agree that there should be no exposure of private or
> personal information through any contest log administration process.
>
> That said, there is no private or personal information contained in a log
> file that I am aware of.
>
> I'm open to being convinced otherwise, but I'm still mystified as to what
> personal data you are concerned about.
>
> 73,
>
> Bob W5OV
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ron Notarius W3WN [mailto:wn3vaw at verizon.net]
> Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 12:57 PM
> To: 'Bob Naumann'; cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] Two points for intra-NA QSOs in CQWW?
>
> We've been over this before.
>
> Strictly speaking, my station location or contact information for a given
> contest entry does not necessarily match my legal address with the FCC; some
> use a PO Box or other type of mail drop, which may not be where they
> operated from.
>
> I have seen contest entry forms request information such as telephone
> numbers, email addresses, in some cases where it is relevant, even birth
> dates.  Information that is not collected by the FCC, and information that
> may not necessarily be in the "public" domain.
>
> But enough.  I'm not rehashing this with you again Bob.  Clearly we don't
> agree on this point.
>
> That all aside... the link that Steve provided earlier was not to a CQ
> contest-related site, but to another site all together.  That doesn't bother
> you at all, that open logs & related data are being copied and used on other
> sites for purposes beyond the control of the contest committees or sponsors?
>
>
> Well, sorry.  As I said earlier... I might be wrong.  I don't pretend to
> have all the answers.  But I firmly believe that mandatory Open Logs are
> wrong.  And examples like the one shown by this little revelation only
> reinforce that belief.
>
> 73
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bob Naumann [mailto:W5OV at W5OV.COM]
> Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 12:18 PM
> To: 'Ron Notarius W3WN'; n2ic at arrl.net; cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] Two points for intra-NA QSOs in CQWW?
>
> Ron,
>
> The place you lose me is when you claim that a contest log contains
> "personal or private information".
>
> I just don't follow this logic at all.
>
> What "specific personal information" would otherwise be in a submitted log?
>
> Your name and address?  That's already public information, so that can't be
> it.
>
> >From looking at way too many of these log files, I have never seen anything
> personal in nature divulged in a log, nor is there any requirement to do so
> by any contest sponsor.
>
> W5OV
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ron
> Notarius W3WN
> Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 10:55 AM
> To: n2ic at arrl.net; cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Two points for intra-NA QSOs in CQWW?
>
> Strictly speaking, that is not my log.  That is a synthesis of what the
> computer "thinks" is my log, based on other submitted entries.
>
> And, at least technically, specific personal information that would be in my
> submitted log is not included in this synthesis.
>
> The broader point is that this demonstrates exactly what I've been talking
> about.  It is bad enough that, in general, our rights to privacy and
> confidentiality in personal matters is getting more eroded every day.  And
> it is unfortunate, to say the least, that others (wittingly or unwittingly)
> have conceded their rights, for what they are told is the 'greater good' --
> sometimes it is, but sometimes it's not.
>
> This demonstrates that there are those who have few if any reservations
> about making public others personal or private information... and then using
> it against the wishes of those individuals.
>
> Regardless... I know that I'm wasting my time discussing this with the
> majority who are active on this forum.  It is contrary to many opinions, and
> to many others, they are tired of hearing it.  So be it.
>
> But I am disappointed, to say the least, that you expect me to abandon my
> principles because someone else lacks scruples.
>
> I may be wrong.  But I am not intentionally a hypocrite.
>
> 73
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CQ-Contest [mailto:cq-contest-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of
> Steve London
> Sent: Sunday, March 10, 2013 11:35 AM
> To: cq-contest at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Two points for intra-NA QSOs in CQWW?
>
> Ron,
>
> IIRC, the primary reason you stopped submitting logs is because you
> objected to the logs becoming "public", viewable by anyone.
>
> Well, you can start submitting logs again, because despite your best
> effort, your log is public, anyway. See
> http://rate.pileup.ru/vlog.php?call=W3WN .
>
> 73,
> Steve, N2IC
>
> On 03/09/2013 05:09 PM, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote:
>> I see.  Thanks Barry.
>>
>> There are those of use who operate in the contest, but do not submit logs
>> for any of a variety of reasons.
>>
>> I guess our opinions aren't important then.
>>
>> Pity.  This used to be one of my favorite contests, too.
>>
>> 73
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>