Topband: ARRL DXCC - 160 Meters

[Greg]

I'm a 160 meter DXCC card checker...so I thought I would respond to this.
First of all let me say that the DXCC card checkers really need to have an
updated manual so that all card checkers have the same understanding and
there is a reference to refer to.  As far as I know there is none although
NC1L said he was working on a new one before he had his accident.  The
qualifications for being a 160 meter card checker are simply being appointed
as a card checker and also having a 160 meter DXCC.  (Not all card checkers
have a 160 meter DXCC.  If they do not, they cannot check 160 meter cards.)

My understanding of what I'm supposed to do when I check a 160 meter card is
to simply write the time that is on the card on the check sheet.  Our job as
card checkers is not to decide whether a card is good or not but to confirm
that the information that is reported is accurate.  However, if we have a
suspicion that a card is not good, we note it on the check sheet....but let
the ARRL DXCC personnel make the final decision.  That's what I do; others
may have a different understanding.  73, Greg-N4CC

-----Original Message-----
From: Topband <topband-bounces at contesting.com> On Behalf Of w5zn at w5zn.org
Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 3:21 PM
To: topband <topband at contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL DXCC - 160 Meters

I haven't really followed the 160 meter DXCC card checking process closely
since I retired from ARRL elected volunteer service almost 10 years ago and
after my good friend Dave NN1N departed I lost any real inquiry opportunity
other than a "regular" member would have ":-))" so I have no clue what the
current procedure is for a DXCC Field Checker to validate 160 meter DXCC
cards.

Regardless, as Jeff ZM urges, drop a note to the DXCC desk at HQ and also
maybe your ARRL Director (please don't bug a Director in another Division,
bug yours!). I would expect it to be investigated if enough folks raise the
issue.

73 Joel W5ZN


On 2018-11-17 08:08, Bill Tippett wrote:
>>> "There have been no uploads for OK1YQ therefore it all has to be 
>>> cards. 73
> 
> Clive GM3POI"
> 
> 
> Thanks Clive.  I was under the mistaken impression that ARRL had 
> closed
> 
> the previous loopholes in their paper card process but that is clearly 
> not
> 
> the case.  This (paper cheating on 160 cards) has been going on since 
> at
> 
> least the late 1980s, so I thought the process would have been 
> corrected
> 
> by now.  Something as simple as "IF 160 total is in the Top X, 
> crosscheck
> 
> with someone knowledgeable about 160" (even a past or current ARRL 
> President
> 
> would do...LOL).  I don't know what the qualifications are for "160 
> certified"
> 
> log checkers but this may need to be reviewed.
> 
> 
> I was also not intending to cast any aspersions about the integrity of
> 
> LOTW, but as we've seen in the news the past few years, ANYTHING 
> connected
> 
> to the Internet is subject to hacks.  I'm sure ARRL will be 
> investigating
> 
> everything in their validation process.  They are our last and best 
> hope
> 
> for maintaining the integrity of DXCC (notwithstanding remote country
> 
> cheating, which is another topic).
> 
> 
> 73,  Bill  W4ZV
> 
> 
> P.S  I know of at least 6 folks who have been disqualified for 160 
> cheating,
> 
> so yes, ARRL does care about this.
> _________________
> Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband 
> Reflector
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector