[CQ-Contest] LoTW confirmation rates

Joe Subich, W4TV w4tv at subich.com
Tue Feb 11 13:57:56 EST 2014

On 2/11/2014 1:23 PM, Radio K0HB wrote:
> Some folks would complain if they were hanged with a new (free) rope.

Someone needs to point out that the emperor [still] has no clothes.

Rick, Bob and Dave have done a marvelous job rebooting Trusted QSL
and expensive new hardware has restored the original rapid processing
(time from upload to appearance) of LotW but none of this has done a
thing to fix the problems in the LotW server itself.


   ... Joe, W4TV

> 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