[Fourlanders] W4NH QSL's

Wed Jun 9 05:23:51 PDT 2010

To All - WARNING - This is an angry rant, but I really needed to vent this.
I don't care if this is in public as publicly venting this frustration is
what I needed. Damn the torpedoes...

Greg, Jeff and Eugene this may not be fair, but I am REALLY REALLY ANGRY
about LoTW and needed to vent. You will not be able to reply to the
Fourlanders list where this started, unless you subscribe. I will forward
any comments that you ask to be sent to the list without modification. The
following are thoughts from myself, an ARRL Life member that is active
during VHF/UHF+ contests related to LoTW:

In this age of full bandwidth wireless and portable internet video in the
palm or your hand I am completely underwhelmed by the prospect of creating
symbolic relics from processed pieces of dead trees. I am speaking of QSL
cards. Why can't people apply for a VUCC award electronically? My opinion is
that incompetence, fear, stupidity and lying are the reasons reasons why. I
gave up on LoTW more than five years ago. It does not support VUCC. VUCC
support was promised nearly 10, YES TEN!, years ago. THIS IS F#@*ING
INCOMPETENCE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>From the "Logbook of the World Specification" version 4.1B, dated May 29 and
July 27, 2001 (schizophrenic in itself):

"The Logbook Confirmation Processor will initially be used only for DXCC
(see section
2.4.4, “Confirmation Processing”.). However, Logbook includes the
functionality required
to handle other awards such as WAS and VUCC. The details described here
apply mostly
to the DXCC program, but it is expected that processing techniques will be
similar for the
other awards programs."

Why the f$^& can't the ARRL manage to add VUCC (and most ALL of their other
award programs) to LOTW? Their UTTER and COMPLETE lack of leadership in this
area has created a climate where eQSL, QRZ, CQ and others have moved in to
fill the void for electronic QSL'ing. A void, and head start, of ten years
innovation tweaking and refining that the ARRL has lost forever to the
single almighty hob-goblin of false DXCC SECURITY.

LoTW uses many times more security than my online 401k, personal banking and
mortgage accounts COMBINED! My GOD people! We're talking about the
difference between a scribbled piece of paper from who knows where being
accepted as "proof" versus double blind one way encryption for something
that still is derived from the personal personal honor of the two operators
claiming the contact.

There is no amount of security and encryption in the world that will keep
people from lying or gaming the systems. LoTW included.

Yes, I am mad as H&!! about LoTW. I gave up on adding anything to it months
before my last certificates expired in September of 2005. Based on the
current prognosis, I expect the first glimmer of VUCC support on LoTW might
be at the peak of the next sunspot cycle. Yes, I mean the peak of 25 which
may not be for 70 years, if we really are experiencing another Maunder
Minimum. Waiting for LoTW to support VUCC is rather like "Waiting for
Godot." They are both classic tragic comedies.

Thank you all. I feel better. Oh, by the way. The new ARRL website sucks
rotten eggs. It has less content than the old site. The new site is pretty,
but the huge graphics are useless by taking up so much space as to scroll
off most pages intended content. Utter rubbish. As a member, I do not feel
supported. I am rather wishing I could get all my membership money back
now...

Brian McCarthy
NX9O

On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 1:51 PM, Brian McCarthy <brian at rfacres.com> wrote:

> The volume is not that large. Maybe as many as 20-30 for a June or
> September contest. More if there is a huge band opening. The ugly truth is
> that I had not been able to get myself to work on QSL's for the last year
> and a half with my unemployment and related issues. I sent out about 80
> pieces with about 110 total cards.
>
> Now that we have been at the same primary location for so many years, not
> as many want the cards. The trouble is in the exceptions. Would you believe
> that there are 6m and 2m county hunters out there?!? They want the specific
> county we were operating from indicated. Unlucky for us, there is a county
> line smack through the middle of the campsite.
>
> Most people seem to want an individual card for each band. There have been
> many times where I have sent 3-4 cards in one transaction (one card for each
> band). I had one or two in this last batch that wanted cards from both Soco
> Bald and "Sanford Shed" (W4ZST's).
>
> At the moment, everything from year 2000 onward is in one database file. I
> have to watch out for the July and January cards versus the June September
> cards as one should say Soco Bald and the other should be Dahlonega. If we
> operate other small contests, I will need to indicate the correct location
> on those cards.
>
> Since the volume is not large, I have been making the cards from 8 1/2 x 11
> card stock paper. The design is simple, but easy to read. All the
> information is on one side. By making the cards, I can customize them for
> the odd requests. I have a few cards that say Hayward county and a few that
> say Swain. I still have a few cards that say Glassy Knob and Wine Spring
> Bald, but nobody has asked for those in a few years. I use a paper cutter to
> keep the slices square and clean.
>
> To add the QSO information, I use 30-up Avery label sheets and QSL'ing
> software, BV7 by DF3CB. The individual QSO information can be searched
> easily and tracked reasonably. I would not want to chase DXCC using BV7, but
> it is very well suited to answering piles of cards quickly.
>
> To get the data into BV7, I use the ADIF export function from Writelog.
> These can be imported directly into the BV7 database.
>
> I don't really see how this could be easily divided up to multiple people.
> One thing that would help, a stack of printed Soco Bald and Dahlonega cards.
> The Soco Bald cards should have the two counties as check boxes for the
> county hunters. Something like 250 or 500 of each should set the starter
> supply up nicely.
>
> Anyhow, this is probably much more information than you expected in this
> email. Watch for my next one where I rant on LoTW and copy ARRL Section and
> Division representatives...
>
> Brian
> NX9O
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 11:42 PM, Jim Worsham <wa4kxy at bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>> I have no idea who that was but I have a question.  How many W4NH QSL
>> cards
>> are you processing in a year?  I imagine after a contest it could be
>> substantial.  I mention this because this is a group effort and if you
>> need
>> help processing those cards in a timely fashion don't be shy about asking.
>>
>> 73
>> Jim, W4KXY
>>
>>
>> It doesn't matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn't matter how
>> smart
>> you are.  If it doesn't agree with experiment, it's wrong.
>> Richard P. Feynman
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: fourlanders-bounces at contesting.com
>> [mailto:fourlanders-bounces at contesting.com] On Behalf Of Brian McCarthy
>> Sent: Sunday, June 06, 2010 10:37 PM
>> To: Fourlanders
>> Subject: [Fourlanders] W4NH QSL's
>>
>> I made an effort to get all the W4NH QSL'ing of SASE'd cards answered. I
>> finished this weekend and the envelopes were dropped off at the P.O.
>> today.
>> I was watching to see if there was a card from a local that had been
>> complaining about not getting a card. I did not really see any cards from
>> Forsyth or North Fulton. Does anyone recall who it was that complained on
>> the air (6m?) about not getting a card?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Brian
>> NX9O
>> _______________________________________________
>> Fourlanders mailing list
>> Fourlanders at contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/fourlanders
>>
>>
>>
>