Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: An alternative for duplicate management ...

Expand Messages
  • ns0i@comcast.net
    Thought this was for LOtW help if you need it. Another fine example of ranting from an unqualified poster. NS0I From: Joe Subich, W4TV Sent: Tuesday,
    Message 1 of 219 , Jan 1, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      Thought this was for LOtW help if you need it.  Another fine example of ranting from an "unqualified" poster.
       
      NS0I

      Sent: Tuesday, January 01, 2013 1:08 PM
      Subject: Re: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: An alternative for duplicate management ....

       


      I would suggest that the other two do not but why don't you verify
      that for yourself?

      73,

      ... Joe, W4TV

      On 1/1/2013 12:58 PM, Javier Henderson wrote:

      > Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
      >> > This is no help whatsoever.
      >>
      >> I just told you which
      one did it right.
      >
      > Great. Which ones do not?
      >
      > -jav
      k4jh
      >
      >
      >
      >
      ------------------------------------
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups
      Links
      >
      >
      >
      >






      =======
      Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
      (Email Guard: 9.0.0.2308, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.20930)
      http://www.pctools.com
      =======





      =======
      Email scanned by PC Tools - No viruses or spyware found.
      (Email Guard: 9.0.0.2308, Virus/Spyware Database: 6.20930)
      http://www.pctools.com
      =======
    • Joe Subich, W4TV
      ... ARRL are not in the data warehousing business and likely can not (or should not) afford the accelerated obsolescence generated when there is need to
      Message 219 of 219 , Jan 2, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        > Three years is an eternity-- especially in the hardware area.

        ARRL are not in the data warehousing business and likely can not
        (or should not) afford the accelerated obsolescence generated when
        there is need to maintain excess capacity or support inefficient
        programming. Given their member funded base, each purchase/project
        should be as cost effective as possible - and that includes moving
        some "costs" to the users in potentially tighter input requirements.

        > I also want to point out that date alone is not a good parameter to
        > use for determining dup status.

        That is true ... I tend to use "date" as shorthand for "date and start
        time of the last QSO record uploaded".

        > Also there needs to be some easy way for one to load "old logs" e.g.
        > transcribed from paper without being hassled by the system.

        I would not expect someone to be transcribing old logs into one of the
        contest programs that have the issues with redundant uploads. There
        are far better tools for that purpose. Users would certainly do one
        time uploads of a log that had been transcribed - much like the one
        time upload of a contest log after the submission deadline had passed.

        > Most decisions will be cost/resource driven. What you may want,
        > might not be affordable. The most costly part of any system generally
        > is new software programming.

        There is nothing to prevent shifting some of that cost to the users in
        terms of tighter standards for uploaded data. If those standards save
        substantial costs in either hardware or programming, they are justified
        in a "member/user supported" environment.

        Those users who generate the largest expense (e.g., wasted processing
        time, etc.) deserve to bear the largest "cost" in inconvenience and
        data scrutiny.

        73,

        ... Joe, W4TV


        On 1/2/2013 10:49 AM, Brian Alsop wrote:
        > Joe,
        >
        > Three years is an eternity-- especially in the hardware area. Many of us
        > will be SK's by then anyhow.
        >
        > Why not wait and see what actually happens with the hardware update?
        >
        > I also want to point out that date alone is not a good parameter to use
        > for determining dup status. Many of us have hundreds of QSO's on a
        > given date. It needs to be at a minimum date and time Also there
        > needs to be some easy way for one to load "old logs" e.g. transcribed
        > from paper without being hassled by the system.
        >
        > Most decisions will be cost/resource driven. What you may want, might
        > not be affordable. The most costly part of any system generally is new
        > software programming.
        >
        > 73 de Brian/K3KO
        >
        > On 1/2/2013 15:31, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
        >>
        >> Brian,
        >
        > the same issue will return in about
        >> three years unless the software has been "fixed" to be more efficient
        >> and eliminate the redundant QSOs without wasting the system resources.
        >>
        >> Whether that "fix" is user education, improved logging software, and
        >> enhanced tQSL that removes the redundancies, or a LotW server that
        >> rejects uploads that reach a threshold of dupes, is an open question.
        >> I would posit that *all* of the above will be required if only because
        >> there are some in each area (users and software developers) who can
        >> not be informed or are not motivated to deal with the issues within
        >> their control.
        >>
        >> 73,
        >>
        >> ... Joe, W4TV
        >>
        >> On 1/2/2013 10:08 AM, Brian Alsop wrote:
        >> > Those are only two possibilities.
        >> >
        >> > A third is that the new hardware solves the current problem and the ARRL
        >> > "kicks the can down the road" on software.
        >> >
        >> > Kicking the can down the road is a time honored tradition.
        >> >
        >> > Look at the companies that didn't convert from COBOL based software to
        >> > something else for several decades.
        >> >
        >> > I agree with one postee. Doing anything that drives away current or
        >> > potential users makes the system that much less useful.
        >> >
        >> > A fourth possibility is to shut the system down permanently.
        >> >
        >> > 73 de Brian/K3KO
        >> >
        >> >>
        >> >> Either ARRL educates the users and the software developers or they must
        >> >> eventually reject the defective logs.
        >> >>
        >> >> 73,
        >> >>
        >> >> ... Joe, W4TV
        >> >>
        >> >
        >> >
        >> > -----
        >> > No virus found in this message.
        >> > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
        >> > Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2637/5503 - Release Date: 01/02/13
        >> >
        >> >
        >> >
        >> > ------------------------------------
        >> >
        >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >> >
        >> >
        >> >
        >> >
        >>
        >>
        >>
        >> No virus found in this message.
        >> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com>
        >> Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2637/5503 - Release Date: 01/02/13
        >>
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > -----
        > No virus found in this message.
        > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
        > Version: 2012.0.2221 / Virus Database: 2637/5503 - Release Date: 01/02/13
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.