[CQ-Contest] LoTW confirmation rates

Radio K0HB kzerohb at gmail.com
Tue Feb 11 13:23:29 EST 2014

Some folks would complain if they were hanged with a new (free) rope.

73, de Hans, K0HB
🌵Sent from Arizona 🌞

On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 11:19 AM, null <Ktfrog007 at aol.com> wrote:

> Hi,
> I should have qualified my "runs so poorly" statement, or left it out  
> entirely as it was peripheral to my point.
> The uploading log-jam problem was fixed a while back and there is new TQSL  
> software which is slick as can be and doesn't leave .tq8 files cluttering  
> my  computer.  
> However, there are other problems and I've encountered many of  them.   The 
> ARRL recognizes this and has set up a subcommittee to deal  with 'the 
> "technical debt" owed because Logbook's success has  outrun its original design.' 
>  Go to the LoTW home page and look at the news  items along the left side, 
> particularly those from
> Jan 30, 2014
> Apr 28, 2013
> Apr 17, 2013
> Also look at W4TV's reply (below).  He states it better than I  can.
> Thanks for all the LoTW confirmations.
> 73,
> Ken, AB1J
> In a message dated 2014-02-11 3:56:27 P.M. Coordinated Universal Tim,  
> w5gn at mxg.com writes:
> I was  going to post a reply, but decided to keep it private; I'm surprised 
>  at
> your claim of "run so poorly".  I just renewed my certificate and  it was 
> a completely user friendly experience, and I find the TQSL single  program
> interface from which you can do everything is far better than prior  tools.
> I uploaded 3000 Qs and within a day they had been posted to my  account.
> What did you find wrong?
> 73
> Barry  EI/W5GN
> In a message dated 2014-02-11 3:50:18 P.M. Coordinated Universal Tim,  
> lists at subich.com writes:
>>  Its too bad there isn't as much reflector traffic praising LotW now
>>  as  there has been (in the past) complaining about it.
> It's easy  to hide a problem by spending $$$ to move it to faster
> hardware.  To  date nothing significant has been done to resolve what
> the LotW Advisory  Committee calls LotW's "substantial technical debt."
> A second developer has  not been hired to focus specifically on fixing
> basic issues with the LotW  code and implementing new awards (e.g. WAZ).
> Now staff wants a *second*  system (why don't they fix the disk system
> and use the old hardware?) as a  test platform, etc. and the current
> IT Manager is wasting time on things  like the ARRL Centennial QSO
> Party ... and disabling features that don't  work correctly.
> LotW will get praise when it is fixed ... putting a  bigger engine in
> front of a transmission that is inefficient doesn't fix  the problems
> in the transmission even though the car goes faster for a  while.
> 73,
> ... Joe,  W4TV
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list