Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
Roger... As a new ham operator (1 year now).. I'm impressed by ARRL and what they do. The publications, the website and licensing information and support. The fair cost of membership, the speed of package deliver to Hawaii, email response. The only thing I can complain about is the backlog in LOTW but they're working to fix that now with an upgrade. Not a big deal. It's not like I can't log away in the meantime...I'm also impressed by eqsl and how easy that system is.. well designed and certainly worth uploading logs to.. takes about 60 seconds... export log by date from N1MM.. upload and done...LOTW is just a few more steps. Anyway... as a new operator with no experience and new eyes.. the whole ham radio experience is fascinating.I had no idea how complex it was. So much out there.. so many options.. the licensing levels.. propagation all over the place... up.. down.. closed.. It must have been an interesting experience for those working 20-30-40+ years in Ham.. I can only imagine.Now we have the Internet and the equipment.. I find myself looking up cluster reports while shopping!! I wonder if I could hear them etc... I grew up with computers in the 80s. Old TI-99/4A with cassette recorder for data storage.. I think I need to go blind more often.. no peaking.. :-) Anyway..there's always going to be little issues here and there.. but as a newbie.. it's pretty freak'n awesome! Merry Christmas!! Bryan WH7DX [CONFIDENTIALITY AND PRIVACY NOTICE] Information transmitted by this email is proprietary to Mr. Mrs. B and is intended for use only by the individual or entity to which it is addressed, or where ever the hell it ends up, and will almost certainly contain information that will offend a large portion of the population, which isn't our concern. If you are not the intended lucky recipient, or it appears that this mail has been forwarded to you without the proper authority of the Wizard of Email or Al Gore, you are notified that any thought, use, or consumption of this email is entirely your choice. In such case, Bon AppetitNote: A $.02 Internet Tax was charged for receiving this email and all funds were given to some family somewhere in America or the U.N Have a nice day. ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
And while you're at it, why shouldn't SO Assisted be separated from Multi-single? That is a relic of the earliest days of packet, and hasn't made sense for at least 20 years. 73, Pete N4ZR Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at http://reversebeacon.net, blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com. For spots, please go to your favorite ARC V6 or VE7CC DX cluster node. On 12/18/2012 6:26 PM, Jim Brown wrote: On 12/18/2012 3:11 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: ARRL 160 meter contest is based on *Sections*. Only in part -- it's also based on DX entities as multipliers, and US/VE stations get 2.5X the point credit for a QSO with a DX station. It makes no earthly sense to change the rules for one or two sections after thirty plus years of the contest. If the Rules are poorly conceived (and they are), it certainly does make sense to change them. But the needed changes go far beyond equalizing KP2 and VP2V -- the Rules give Zone 5 a 10:1 scoring advantage over Zone 3 (and about half that over the Midwest and Great Plains), and make the contest so boring for Zone 3 that most of us avoid it. 73, Jim K9YC ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
Maybe because XE is in NA while Brazil, Argentina, Chile, and Venezuela are not. And maybe, Mexican states are as important to Mexicans as US States and VE provinces are to their northern neighbors. http://www.worldatlas.com/webimage/countrys/namaps.htm Finding OX is considered a part of NA was an education. 73 Art K6XT~~ Success is going from failure to failure without a loss of enthusiasm. ARRL, GMCC, CW OPS, NAQCC ARRL TA On 12/18/2012 9:29 PM, W4TV wrote: There are those who don't like CQ's format, those who don't like the new ARRL 10 Meter format with Mexican States (why Mexico and not Brazil or Argentina, or Chile, or Venezuela?) - ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
As Joe stated, if the rules do not appeal to you, don't operate. This is why I haven't operated in the ARRL 160 for years as it really is a 160M SS, and I've never found the normal SS to be all that interesting. There is always the SPDC, the CQ 160, etc. The only one I normally spend any time operating in is the CQ 160 CW. 73, Stew K3ND From: Joe Subich, W4TV li...@subich.com To: topband@contesting.com Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 6:11 PM Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More ARRL 160 meter contest is based on *Sections*. KP2 and KP4 are *SECTIONS* as are South Florida, North Florida, West Central Florida and any other section. It makes no earthly sense to change the rules for one or two sections after thirty plus years of the contest. If you don't like the rules, find a different contest. 73, ... Joe, W4TV ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
On 12/19/2012 9:34 AM, GALE STEWARD wrote: As Joe stated, if the rules do not appeal to you, don't operate. That's a favored operator's view of things. There are, for all practical purposes, three major 160M contests (ARRL, and the two CQWW events), and their rules all strongly favor the Atlantic basin contesting establishment. If you're in that favored region, you're generally happy with the rules, and if you're not in that region you find the contests unappealing. The only 160M contest with decent rules for everyone is the Stew Perry, but it has, unfortunately, not attracted the critical mass participation needed to make it fun either -- even with a very good station, you run out of stations to work pretty early in the evening. I'm an ARRL member, and a CQ Magazine subscriber. These contests are being administered by entities that I support, and I have a reasonable expectation that they should fairly support my interests too. Sadly, they are the only game in town, so if you've built a nice 160M station and want it exercise it, it's your only choice. Imagine owning a nice car, and the only paved roads are 2,000 miles away! 73, Jim K9YC ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
AA6YQ comments below -Original Message- From: Topband [mailto:topband-boun...@contesting.com]On Behalf Of Gary Smith Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 11:29 PM To: Topband@contesting.com Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More I use Logic software for normal logging, awards tracking and for contesting. I should learn N1MM for when I help out with a team effort and if they use that. I believe the author was one of the original authors for the LOTW format. http://www.hosenose.com/logic/default.aspx I meant to say I believe the author of the Logic logging software was one of the original authors for the LOTW format. There is no LotW format. I suspect you are referring to the Amateur Data Interchange Format (ADIF), which was developed in 1996 by Ray WF1B and Dennis WN4AZY; Dennis is the author of LOGic. ADIF is employed in two ways by LotW: QSOs uploaded to LotW are conveyed as encrypted ADIF records, and information about a QSO's acceptance and confirmation that was requested via LotW's programmatic interface is returned in ADIF records. 73, Dave, AA6YQ ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
On 12/18/2012 8:29 PM, Gary Smith wrote: I meant to say I believe the author of the Logic logging software was one of the original authors for the LOTW format. Gary KA1J That explains a lot. The Logic software has the same amateurish look and feel that LOTW has. I am sorry that I wasted my money on it. Rick N6RK ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
I meant to say I believe the author of the Logic logging software was one of the original authors for the LOTW format. Gary KA1J That explains a lot. The Logic software has the same amateurish look and feel that LOTW has. I am sorry that I wasted my money on it. Rick N6RK Rick, And I disagree with that evaluation completely. Logic does everything I want, does it accurately and does it instantly, it follows my K3 however I configure it. At this time I have the log screen exactly as I want it with the log in one quadrant, the analysis of my needed DXCC on all bands modes with the current band illuminated in red letters, the results of my most recent QSOs listed chronologically in another quadrant and a Spot log showing only the needed spots compared to logics database. I have it customized the log entry fields to move in which fields I wish, based on how I operate and frankly, there's nothing a different log format would do for me that this does not. Here's how my Logic9 looks at this moment. You may need to click on the screen-shot to enlarge it to normal size/clarity. http://doctorgary.net/logic9_display.jpg Amateurish? You be the judge Gary KA1J ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
We should face a couple of facts. Budget wise ARRL is a very small outfit, serving a very small population. DXCC is just a fraction, and not a very vital fraction, of ARRL's efforts. What's probably more vital to the future success of Amateur Radio is not us reprobate dinosaurs with ohmygosh external HF antennae, if you'll permit me to generalize beginning with myself. Its the public service volunteer sector. Notice who gets the QST writeups, and who gets the once a year minority report. Nonetheless I rate the DXCC department first class bearing in mind their constraints. Some evidence: My CQWW CW QSO's are fully implemented in LoTW including QSL's from QSO partners who also uploaded. I made an online card submission 11 November. It was processed 30 November. (I/ve lost track whether 11 NOV is the day they received the cards, or the day I made the online submission). I made a LoTW submission on 13 November. It was processed and listed on the SAME DAY 13 November. On the down side my OK DX RTTY submission, uploaded 18 December 12 (for those sans calendars that's yesterday), is not in LoTW yet. Damn those Connecticut Yankees, they just can't seem to get anything done! Lest we forget where ARRL gets its funding. This gotta have it now mentality has only one solution. Those who think ARRL and DXCC operate in the Dark Ages need only send in substantial bequests and whatever problems there are can be fixed. -- 73 Art K6XT~~ Success is going from failure to failure without a loss of enthusiasm. ARRL, GMCC, CW OPS, NAQCC ARRL TA ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
The queue is currently almost 10 days behind. You can track it here http://www.arrl.org/logbook-queue-status Everyone keeps uploading over and over and over because they don't see their QSO's, which likely is compounding the problem to massive levels. They have a new server on order but 6 weeks out I believe. Dave NZ3M On 12/18/2012 3:41 PM, herbs wrote: After several frustrating weeks of trying to figure out why my ARRL LOTW uploads were not registering I decided to contact the company. It seems they are back logged beyond comprehension. Not even the most recent DX-Peditions who have uploaded all there logs are showing up. As a result confirmations will not show either. I certainly hope that some DX-ers don't get bumped from the Honor Roll because of this slow down in accreditation. LOTW used to be very fast and now it is so slow to almost not be worth the money charged for the service. I complained in past posts about the lack of fairness in the ARRL 160 Meter Contest for not treating the U.S. Territories as DX, no not even KP1 or KP5, none. But with the ARRL 10 Meter contest that followed, stations located in the U.S. Territories are indeed DX as it should be. Why in the world won't anyone on the CAC or at HQ realize that there is no acceptable reason for not correcting this problem. or if there is they aren't saying. I struggle to find out who is responsible for prohibiting this correction. HQ tells me to write the CAC members and the CAC members tell me they have no power to do anything unless they are tasked by those in command at HQ. I see how easy it was to give Ontario more sections and even in the ARRL 10 Meter Contest you get multipliers by working Mexican states that nobody knows about, that some how found relevance...I don't know how this is logically done but someone must have the way to make things happen at HQ. I presume that there are some fundemental democratic principles that would allow for debate fo this topic so I can make my case on behalf of the much malighed U.S. Territories in the structure of this contest's rules. If you know what to do. Please let me know. 73, Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
Herb, I complained in past posts about the lack of fairness in the ARRL 160 Meter Contest for not treating the U.S. Territories as DX, no not even KP1 or KP5, none. But with the ARRL 10 Meter contest that followed, stations located in the U.S. Territories are indeed DX as it should be. Why in the world won't anyone on the CAC or at HQ realize that there is no acceptable reason for not correcting this problem. or if there is they aren't saying. Calling KP2 and KP4 DX for the ARRL 160 Meter Contest would mean that you *could not work DX.* You have bitched for years that DX thought the could not work you - I can find the references in the archives going back almost to be beginning of this list) but it would mean that you got to count each QSO with the rest of us on the mainland as 5 points instead of 2 points. Now you want to be able to work DX but count all your QSOs as five points instead of two? Do you want to be DX or work everybody? Take your pick but don't act like a two year old and say both! 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 12/18/2012 3:41 PM, herbs wrote: After several frustrating weeks of trying to figure out why my ARRL LOTW uploads were not registering I decided to contact the company. It seems they are back logged beyond comprehension. Not even the most recent DX-Peditions who have uploaded all there logs are showing up. As a result confirmations will not show either. I certainly hope that some DX-ers don't get bumped from the Honor Roll because of this slow down in accreditation. LOTW used to be very fast and now it is so slow to almost not be worth the money charged for the service. I complained in past posts about the lack of fairness in the ARRL 160 Meter Contest for not treating the U.S. Territories as DX, no not even KP1 or KP5, none. But with the ARRL 10 Meter contest that followed, stations located in the U.S. Territories are indeed DX as it should be. Why in the world won't anyone on the CAC or at HQ realize that there is no acceptable reason for not correcting this problem. or if there is they aren't saying. I struggle to find out who is responsible for prohibiting this correction. HQ tells me to write the CAC members and the CAC members tell me they have no power to do anything unless they are tasked by those in command at HQ. I see how easy it was to give Ontario more sections and even in the ARRL 10 Meter Contest you get multipliers by working Mexican states that nobody knows about, that some how found relevance...I don't know how this is logically done but someone must have the way to make things happen at HQ. I presume that there are some fundemental democratic principles that would allow for debate fo this topic so I can make my case on behalf of the much malighed U.S. Territories in the structure of this contest's rules. If you know what to do. Please let me know. 73, Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
Joe, I don't ask for bothjust wish to be treated the same way as another station a few miles north (VP2V) . Actually there is little DX on during this contest compared to the others like CQ and TBDC. The ARRL has a list of DXCC entities which works for all their other contests but for some strange reason disallows U.S. Territories for their 160 meter contest. Makes no sense. Herb, KV4FZ On 12/18/2012 6:08 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: Herb, I complained in past posts about the lack of fairness in the ARRL 160 Meter Contest for not treating the U.S. Territories as DX, no not even KP1 or KP5, none. But with the ARRL 10 Meter contest that followed, stations located in the U.S. Territories are indeed DX as it should be. Why in the world won't anyone on the CAC or at HQ realize that there is no acceptable reason for not correcting this problem. or if there is they aren't saying. Calling KP2 and KP4 DX for the ARRL 160 Meter Contest would mean that you *could not work DX.* You have bitched for years that DX thought the could not work you - I can find the references in the archives going back almost to be beginning of this list) but it would mean that you got to count each QSO with the rest of us on the mainland as 5 points instead of 2 points. Now you want to be able to work DX but count all your QSOs as five points instead of two? Do you want to be DX or work everybody? Take your pick but don't act like a two year old and say both! 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 12/18/2012 3:41 PM, herbs wrote: After several frustrating weeks of trying to figure out why my ARRL LOTW uploads were not registering I decided to contact the company. It seems they are back logged beyond comprehension. Not even the most recent DX-Peditions who have uploaded all there logs are showing up. As a result confirmations will not show either. I certainly hope that some DX-ers don't get bumped from the Honor Roll because of this slow down in accreditation. LOTW used to be very fast and now it is so slow to almost not be worth the money charged for the service. I complained in past posts about the lack of fairness in the ARRL 160 Meter Contest for not treating the U.S. Territories as DX, no not even KP1 or KP5, none. But with the ARRL 10 Meter contest that followed, stations located in the U.S. Territories are indeed DX as it should be. Why in the world won't anyone on the CAC or at HQ realize that there is no acceptable reason for not correcting this problem. or if there is they aren't saying. I struggle to find out who is responsible for prohibiting this correction. HQ tells me to write the CAC members and the CAC members tell me they have no power to do anything unless they are tasked by those in command at HQ. I see how easy it was to give Ontario more sections and even in the ARRL 10 Meter Contest you get multipliers by working Mexican states that nobody knows about, that some how found relevance...I don't know how this is logically done but someone must have the way to make things happen at HQ. I presume that there are some fundemental democratic principles that would allow for debate fo this topic so I can make my case on behalf of the much malighed U.S. Territories in the structure of this contest's rules. If you know what to do. Please let me know. 73, Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
On 12/18/2012 2:05 PM, Dave Clouser wrote: The queue is currently almost 10 days behind. You can track it here http://www.arrl.org/logbook-queue-status Everyone keeps uploading over and over and over because they don't see their QSO's, which likely is compounding the problem to massive levels. They have a new server on order but 6 weeks out I believe. It's also made worse by guys uploading their entire log when all they need to do is upload only QSOs since their last upload. A month or so ago, ARRL announced that they found (and have hopefully fixed) a bug in the software that maintains the LOTW upload queue that caused a small percentage of logs to be lost. I upload my log after each contest, and every week or two when there are no contests. DXKeeper makes that very easy. I'm hoping that the server will sort of get caught up after ARRL10M logs are processed and there's been a week or two without major contests .I think the best move for all of us is to cool our jets and let the system catch up, and get the new server online. 73, Jim K9YC ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
ARRL 160 meter contest is based on *Sections*. KP2 and KP4 are *SECTIONS* as are South Florida, North Florida, West Central Florida and any other section. It makes no earthly sense to change the rules for one or two sections after thirty plus years of the contest. If you don't like the rules, find a different contest. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 12/18/2012 5:41 PM, Herb Schoenbohm wrote: Joe, I don't ask for bothjust wish to be treated the same way as another station a few miles north (VP2V) . Actually there is little DX on during this contest compared to the others like CQ and TBDC. The ARRL has a list of DXCC entities which works for all their other contests but for some strange reason disallows U.S. Territories for their 160 meter contest. Makes no sense. Herb, KV4FZ On 12/18/2012 6:08 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: Herb, I complained in past posts about the lack of fairness in the ARRL 160 Meter Contest for not treating the U.S. Territories as DX, no not even KP1 or KP5, none. But with the ARRL 10 Meter contest that followed, stations located in the U.S. Territories are indeed DX as it should be. Why in the world won't anyone on the CAC or at HQ realize that there is no acceptable reason for not correcting this problem. or if there is they aren't saying. Calling KP2 and KP4 DX for the ARRL 160 Meter Contest would mean that you *could not work DX.* You have bitched for years that DX thought the could not work you - I can find the references in the archives going back almost to be beginning of this list) but it would mean that you got to count each QSO with the rest of us on the mainland as 5 points instead of 2 points. Now you want to be able to work DX but count all your QSOs as five points instead of two? Do you want to be DX or work everybody? Take your pick but don't act like a two year old and say both! 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 12/18/2012 3:41 PM, herbs wrote: After several frustrating weeks of trying to figure out why my ARRL LOTW uploads were not registering I decided to contact the company. It seems they are back logged beyond comprehension. Not even the most recent DX-Peditions who have uploaded all there logs are showing up. As a result confirmations will not show either. I certainly hope that some DX-ers don't get bumped from the Honor Roll because of this slow down in accreditation. LOTW used to be very fast and now it is so slow to almost not be worth the money charged for the service. I complained in past posts about the lack of fairness in the ARRL 160 Meter Contest for not treating the U.S. Territories as DX, no not even KP1 or KP5, none. But with the ARRL 10 Meter contest that followed, stations located in the U.S. Territories are indeed DX as it should be. Why in the world won't anyone on the CAC or at HQ realize that there is no acceptable reason for not correcting this problem. or if there is they aren't saying. I struggle to find out who is responsible for prohibiting this correction. HQ tells me to write the CAC members and the CAC members tell me they have no power to do anything unless they are tasked by those in command at HQ. I see how easy it was to give Ontario more sections and even in the ARRL 10 Meter Contest you get multipliers by working Mexican states that nobody knows about, that some how found relevance...I don't know how this is logically done but someone must have the way to make things happen at HQ. I presume that there are some fundemental democratic principles that would allow for debate fo this topic so I can make my case on behalf of the much malighed U.S. Territories in the structure of this contest's rules. If you know what to do. Please let me know. 73, Herb Schoenbohm, KV4FZ ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
On 12/18/2012 3:11 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: ARRL 160 meter contest is based on *Sections*. Only in part -- it's also based on DX entities as multipliers, and US/VE stations get 2.5X the point credit for a QSO with a DX station. It makes no earthly sense to change the rules for one or two sections after thirty plus years of the contest. If the Rules are poorly conceived (and they are), it certainly does make sense to change them. But the needed changes go far beyond equalizing KP2 and VP2V -- the Rules give Zone 5 a 10:1 scoring advantage over Zone 3 (and about half that over the Midwest and Great Plains), and make the contest so boring for Zone 3 that most of us avoid it. 73, Jim K9YC ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
On 12/18/2012 7:11 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: You have bitched for years that DX thought the could not work you - I can find the references in the archives going back almost to be beginning of this list) but it would mean that you got to count each QSO with the rest of us on the mainland as 5 points instead of 2 points. Now you want to be able to work DX but count all your QSOs as five points instead of two? I may have bitched but who wouldn't after being told and scolded by DX stations no DX no DX QRZ W/VE only Many I guess were as confused as i was in calling them in the first place. Again I only want this contest to show an element of fairness. I guess if I do as you suggested then next time stations will not only miss KP4 which did not show this time but also KP2. So about working ARRL sections and as some insist that it is only a 160 meter version of Sweepstakes, then let it be so and like in the much highly enshrined SS not permit *any* DX. Working DX on 160, not some archaic sections is what I am interest in. If participants were tuned into working DX you would not find the band covered by 100's of incessant CQ machines every few hertz trying to hold on to there spot and not working much of anything. I think next time I will do what I wanted to do this time, just work DX and have my phased Beverages on Europe and Africa selected. Some may say this is poor sportsmanshipbut I have tried to get someone to recognize that changes are important to bring out a better contest product. I understand those in their ivy covered office buildings and who call the shots, really don't care to even entertain change for the better. Herb, KV4FZ ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
It's a contest - I don't care if I miss KP4 and KP2 as long as everyone else does too! 73, geo - n4ua On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 7:14 PM, Herb Schoenbohm he...@vitelcom.net wrote: I guess if I do as you suggested then next time stations will not only miss KP4 which did not show this time but also KP2. So about working ARRL sections and as some insist that it is only a 160 meter version of Sweepstakes, then let it be so and like in the much highly enshrined SS not permit *any* DX. Working DX on 160, not some archaic sections is what I am interest in. If participants were tuned into working DX you would not find the band covered by 100's of incessant CQ machines every few hertz trying to hold on to there spot and not working much of anything. I think next time I will do what I wanted to do this time, just work DX and have my phased Beverages on Europe and Africa selected. Some may say this is poor sportsmanshipbut I have tried to get someone to recognize that changes are important to bring out a better contest product. I understand those in their ivy covered office buildings and who call the shots, really don't care to even entertain change for the better. Herb, KV4FZ __**_ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
Some may say this is poor sportsmanshipbut I have tried to get someone to recognize that changes are important to bring out a better contest product. I understand those in their ivy covered office buildings and who call the shots, really don't care to even entertain change for the better. ARRL 160 Meter contest is essentially a 160 Sweepstakes that allows W/VE stations to work DX. If you don't like the format of the contest, don't work it ... after all, there were no VE8, VY1, etc. stations on and haven't been for many years. Change is not necessary and would only hurt a well established product - particularly a change that you advocate that would only benefit a handful of stations who already benefit immensely in other contests. There are those who don't like CQ's format, those who don't like the new ARRL 10 Meter format with Mexican States (why Mexico and not Brazil or Argentina, or Chile, or Venezuela?) - the choice is to not participate and certainly demand changes that will benefit only *ONE* or at most a handful of stations. If you go giving one or two sections a special scoring advantage, why limit it to KP2/KP4? Certainly the scoring disadvantage is just as great in the case of NFL vs. C6 or SFL vs. CO. Once you start making special accommodations where does it stop - GA, SC, NC AL MS? Every set of contest rules gives some an advantage - it's far easier for VY2, VE1, VE9, W1 to work all the 5 point DX than others - and gives some a disadvantage - who wants to be W6/W7 for ARRL 160 - that's the breaks. Other contests have advantages for another set of operators. You don't screw up a contest with 40 years of history because one or two individuals don't like the format - there will always be boundary cases EA9 vs. ZB, IG9/IG9 vs. 9H, 9Y vs. J3, HP vs, HK ... the list can go on and on. No matter what the rules are, *someone* will complain. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 12/18/2012 7:14 PM, Herb Schoenbohm wrote: On 12/18/2012 7:11 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: You have bitched for years that DX thought the could not work you - I can find the references in the archives going back almost to be beginning of this list) but it would mean that you got to count each QSO with the rest of us on the mainland as 5 points instead of 2 points. Now you want to be able to work DX but count all your QSOs as five points instead of two? I may have bitched but who wouldn't after being told and scolded by DX stations no DX no DX QRZ W/VE only Many I guess were as confused as i was in calling them in the first place. Again I only want this contest to show an element of fairness. I guess if I do as you suggested then next time stations will not only miss KP4 which did not show this time but also KP2. So about working ARRL sections and as some insist that it is only a 160 meter version of Sweepstakes, then let it be so and like in the much highly enshrined SS not permit *any* DX. Working DX on 160, not some archaic sections is what I am interest in. If participants were tuned into working DX you would not find the band covered by 100's of incessant CQ machines every few hertz trying to hold on to there spot and not working much of anything. I think next time I will do what I wanted to do this time, just work DX and have my phased Beverages on Europe and Africa selected. Some may say this is poor sportsmanshipbut I have tried to get someone to recognize that changes are important to bring out a better contest product. I understand those in their ivy covered office buildings and who call the shots, really don't care to even entertain change for the better. Herb, KV4FZ ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
Let's not lose the fact that contests on 160 are events as much as contests… they are times when an otherwise barren band fills up. There's a lot of fun just in working all you can. Those of us in deep valleys in Western Colorado have a hard time appreciating the extreme difficulties faced by Eastern stations located on Islands surrounded by salt water. On Dec 18, 2012, at 6:05 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV li...@subich.com wrote: Some may say this is poor sportsmanshipbut I have tried to get someone to recognize that changes are important to bring out a better contest product. I understand those in their ivy covered office buildings and who call the shots, really don't care to even entertain change for the better. ARRL 160 Meter contest is essentially a 160 Sweepstakes that allows W/VE stations to work DX. If you don't like the format of the contest, don't work it ... after all, there were no VE8, VY1, etc. stations on and haven't been for many years. Change is not necessary and would only hurt a well established product - particularly a change that you advocate that would only benefit a handful of stations who already benefit immensely in other contests. There are those who don't like CQ's format, those who don't like the new ARRL 10 Meter format with Mexican States (why Mexico and not Brazil or Argentina, or Chile, or Venezuela?) - the choice is to not participate and certainly demand changes that will benefit only *ONE* or at most a handful of stations. If you go giving one or two sections a special scoring advantage, why limit it to KP2/KP4? Certainly the scoring disadvantage is just as great in the case of NFL vs. C6 or SFL vs. CO. Once you start making special accommodations where does it stop - GA, SC, NC AL MS? Every set of contest rules gives some an advantage - it's far easier for VY2, VE1, VE9, W1 to work all the 5 point DX than others - and gives some a disadvantage - who wants to be W6/W7 for ARRL 160 - that's the breaks. Other contests have advantages for another set of operators. You don't screw up a contest with 40 years of history because one or two individuals don't like the format - there will always be boundary cases EA9 vs. ZB, IG9/IG9 vs. 9H, 9Y vs. J3, HP vs, HK ... the list can go on and on. No matter what the rules are, *someone* will complain. 73, ... Joe, W4TV On 12/18/2012 7:14 PM, Herb Schoenbohm wrote: On 12/18/2012 7:11 PM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote: You have bitched for years that DX thought the could not work you - I can find the references in the archives going back almost to be beginning of this list) but it would mean that you got to count each QSO with the rest of us on the mainland as 5 points instead of 2 points. Now you want to be able to work DX but count all your QSOs as five points instead of two? I may have bitched but who wouldn't after being told and scolded by DX stations no DX no DX QRZ W/VE only Many I guess were as confused as i was in calling them in the first place. Again I only want this contest to show an element of fairness. I guess if I do as you suggested then next time stations will not only miss KP4 which did not show this time but also KP2. So about working ARRL sections and as some insist that it is only a 160 meter version of Sweepstakes, then let it be so and like in the much highly enshrined SS not permit *any* DX. Working DX on 160, not some archaic sections is what I am interest in. If participants were tuned into working DX you would not find the band covered by 100's of incessant CQ machines every few hertz trying to hold on to there spot and not working much of anything. I think next time I will do what I wanted to do this time, just work DX and have my phased Beverages on Europe and Africa selected. Some may say this is poor sportsmanshipbut I have tried to get someone to recognize that changes are important to bring out a better contest product. I understand those in their ivy covered office buildings and who call the shots, really don't care to even entertain change for the better. Herb, KV4FZ ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
Re: Topband: ARRL LOTW and More
I use Logic software for normal logging, awards tracking and for contesting. I should learn N1MM for when I help out with a team effort and if they use that. I believe the author was one of the original authors for the LOTW format. http://www.hosenose.com/logic/default.aspx I meant to say I believe the author of the Logic logging software was one of the original authors for the LOTW format. Gary KA1J ___ It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true. - Bertrand Russell
