[VHFcontesting] It was asked why do I bother with LOTW...

[Peter Laws]

On Thu, Jun 20, 2019 at 9:32 PM K7XC Tim Marek <k7xcnv1 at gmail.com> wrote:

> LOTW is a great tool if you make the effort to understand it and play buy
> the rules and limitations therein.

The original TQSL software sucked.  It was all re-written a few years
ago, primarily by K1MU, and now (with occasional bumps) just works.
The original online directions also sucked but they've been rewritten,
primarily by AA6YQ, and now make sense and can be used by people that
did not write the instructions themselves.

The biggest problem with LOTW is that people refuse to understand how
to use it.  I already had 100 grids on 50 MHz when the ARRL finally
figured out how to make VUCC eligible for LOTW credits a few years
back and immediately applied for it.  Easy peasy.  I've since got the
125 endorsement.  That's in addition to multiple WASes + endorsements
and 4 DXCCs (Phone, RTTY, 15 m, 20 m - I did Mixed with cards).  I'd
submit for WPX but I have so many prefixes that it would cost more
than a couple Chinese HTs to apply for all the awards.  :-)

LOTS of ops don't fill out their station locations correctly and
neglect to add things like counties and zones and even grids.  I have
some QSOs, matched, where the op hasn't bothered putting his state in
his station location.  What's with people?

Rovers are the ones who probably hate LOTW the most but that's more a
function of their logging software - if the logging software doesn't
keep track of the rover's location, how will that data ever make it to
LOTW?

I like cards (and QSL 100%) but they are an anachronism.


-- 
Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!