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

Re%3A%20Duplicate%20Wars

Expand Messages
  • John Rudolph
    I still don t like the idea of having to confirm the email every time. I do like having to reenter your email if it bounces or when there is an issue with your
    Message 1 of 21 , Jan 3, 2013
    • 0 Attachment

      I still don't like the idea of having to confirm the email every time. I do like having to reenter your email if it bounces or when there is an issue with your uploads and you don't respond to league emails that you cant upload until the email issue is fixed. This should include when you use a logger.
       
      John N2YP
    • Frank T Brady
      I don t like the idea of adding email to the loop at all. Why cant tQSL and LOTW communicate and notify the user with pop up messages? 73, Frank w0ecs
      Message 2 of 21 , Jan 4, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        I don't like the idea of adding email to the loop at all.

        Why cant tQSL and LOTW communicate and notify the user with pop up messages?

        73, Frank w0ecs



        On 1/4/2013 2:26 AM, John Rudolph wrote:
         


        I still don't like the idea of having to confirm the email every time. I do like having to reenter your email if it bounces or when there is an issue with your uploads and you don't respond to league emails that you cant upload until the email issue is fixed. This should include when you use a logger.
         
        John N2YP

      • Bill Kasper
        I like the pop-up messages too... Your last upload DATEYYMMDD file had: 15 New QSOs 7 Updated QSOs 15763 Already processed duplicate QSOs Please review your
        Message 3 of 21 , Jan 4, 2013
        • 0 Attachment
          I like the pop-up messages too...

          "Your last upload DATEYYMMDD file had:
          15 New QSOs
          7 Updated QSOs
          15763 Already processed duplicate QSOs

          Please review your Logging Program's
          procedures for DATE or PREVIOUS upload
          avoidance.

          Thank you, more info at www.1234.5678.com
          LoTW Processing Team"

          Bill K WB2SXY

          --end--

          On 1/4/2013 7:51 AM, Frank T Brady wrote:
          > I don't like the idea of adding email to the loop at all.
          >
          > Why cant tQSL and LOTW communicate and notify the user with pop up
          > messages?
          >
          > 73, Frank w0ecs
          >
          >


          -----
          No virus found in this message.
          Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
          Version: 2013.0.2805 / Virus Database: 2637/6001 - Release Date: 01/01/13
        • Frank T Brady
          I also think that LOTW would be a lot more powerful and extensible with a client server relationship between LOTW and tQSL. 73, frank w0ecs
          Message 4 of 21 , Jan 4, 2013
          • 0 Attachment
            I also think that LOTW would be a lot more powerful and extensible with
            a client server relationship between LOTW and tQSL.
            73, frank w0ecs


            On 1/4/2013 9:39 AM, Bill Kasper wrote:
            > I like the pop-up messages too...
            >
            > "Your last upload DATEYYMMDD file had:
            > 15 New QSOs
            > 7 Updated QSOs
            > 15763 Already processed duplicate QSOs
            >
            > Please review your Logging Program's
            > procedures for DATE or PREVIOUS upload
            > avoidance.
            >
            > Thank you, more info at www.1234.5678.com
            > LoTW Processing Team"
            >
            > Bill K WB2SXY
            >
            > --end--
            >
            > On 1/4/2013 7:51 AM, Frank T Brady wrote:
            >> I don't like the idea of adding email to the loop at all.
            >>
            >> Why cant tQSL and LOTW communicate and notify the user with pop up
            >> messages?
            >>
            >> 73, Frank w0ecs
            >>
            >>
            >
            >
            > -----
            > No virus found in this message.
            > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
            > Version: 2013.0.2805 / Virus Database: 2637/6001 - Release Date: 01/01/13
            >
            >
          • Joe Subich, W4TV
            ... Unfortunately, pop-up messages don t work in a batch processing environment and that is what we have with uploads being processed up to 12 days after the
            Message 5 of 21 , Jan 4, 2013
            • 0 Attachment
              > Why cant tQSL and LOTW communicate and notify the user with pop up
              > messages?

              Unfortunately, pop-up messages don't work in a batch processing
              environment and that is what we have with uploads being processed
              up to 12 days after the upload! Putting the information currently
              written to the users' "results" file into an email message would
              be the most convenient way to communicate it.

              By sending an e-mail the user most likely sees it rather than the
              information getting lost in a place most users never go.

              73,

              ... Joe, W4TV


              On 1/4/2013 7:51 AM, Frank T Brady wrote:
              > I don't like the idea of adding email to the loop at all.
              >
              > Why cant tQSL and LOTW communicate and notify the user with pop up
              > messages?
              >
              > 73, Frank w0ecs
              >
              >
              >
              > On 1/4/2013 2:26 AM, John Rudolph wrote:
              >>
              >>
              >> I still don't like the idea of having to confirm the email every time.
              >> I do like having to reenter your email if it bounces or when there is
              >> an issue with your uploads and you don't respond to league emails that
              >> you cant upload until the email issue is fixed. This should include
              >> when you use a logger.
              >>
              >> John N2YP
              >>
              >
              >
            • Joe Subich, W4TV
              John, ... How would you know that your e-mail was bouncing unless you looked for e-mail that never arrived? Since LotW has not provided e-mail feedback in the
              Message 6 of 21 , Jan 4, 2013
              • 0 Attachment
                John,

                > I do like having to reenter your email if it bounces or when there is
                > an issue with your uploads and you don't respond to league emails
                > that you cant upload until the email issue is fixed.

                How would you know that your e-mail was bouncing unless you looked
                for e-mail that never arrived? Since LotW has not provided e-mail
                feedback in the past, most users will never be looking for it now.

                Blocking uploads is more problematic than rejecting files with high
                levels of duplicates given that there is no way to provide feedback.

                73,

                ... Joe, W4TV


                On 1/4/2013 2:26 AM, John Rudolph wrote:
                >
                >
                > I still don't like the idea of having to confirm the email every
                > time. I do like having to reenter your email if it bounces or when
                > there is an issue with your uploads and you don't respond to league
                > emails that you cant upload until the email issue is fixed. This
                > should include when you use a logger. John N2YP
                >
              • Mark Robinson
                I wish they didn t..it is a royal pita. It is bad enough getting this stuff to work the first time around,, let alone having to repeat the pain Mark N1UK ...
                Message 7 of 21 , Jan 4, 2013
                • 0 Attachment
                  I wish they didn't..it is a royal pita. It is bad enough getting this
                  stuff to work the first time around,, let alone having to repeat the pain

                  Mark N1UK

                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: "Dave AA6YQ" <aa6yq@...>
                  To: <ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com>
                  Sent: Friday, 04 January, 2013 2:20 AM
                  Subject: RE: [ARRL-LOTW] Re%3A%20Duplicate%20Wars


                  My understanding is that as a matter of ARRL Management policy, "yes".

                  73,

                  Dave, AA6YQ

                  From: ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
                  Of John Rudolph
                  Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 2:20 AM
                  To: arrl-lotw@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: [ARRL-LOTW] Re%3A%20Duplicate%20Wars


                  Do the certificates have to expire?

                  John N2YP

                  ________________________________________
                  No virus found in this message.
                  Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                  Version: 10.0.1430 / Virus Database: 2637/5508 - Release Date: 01/03/13



                  ------------------------------------

                  Yahoo! Groups Links
                • Joe Subich, W4TV
                  ... It would still need to expire on the expiration date of the license. Part of the philosophy is related to certifying a valid license. 73, ... Joe, W4TV
                  Message 8 of 21 , Jan 4, 2013
                  • 0 Attachment
                    On 1/4/2013 10:58 AM, Mark Robinson wrote:
                    > I wish they didn't..it is a royal pita.

                    It would still need to expire on the expiration date of the license.
                    Part of the philosophy is related to certifying a valid license.

                    73,

                    ... Joe, W4TV


                    On 1/4/2013 10:58 AM, Mark Robinson wrote:
                    > I wish they didn't..it is a royal pita. It is bad enough getting this
                    > stuff to work the first time around,, let alone having to repeat the pain
                    >
                    > Mark N1UK
                    >
                    > ----- Original Message -----
                    > From: "Dave AA6YQ" <aa6yq@...>
                    > To: <ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com>
                    > Sent: Friday, 04 January, 2013 2:20 AM
                    > Subject: RE: [ARRL-LOTW] Re%3A%20Duplicate%20Wars
                    >
                    >
                    > My understanding is that as a matter of ARRL Management policy, "yes".
                    >
                    > 73,
                    >
                    > Dave, AA6YQ
                    >
                    > From: ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
                    > Of John Rudolph
                    > Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 2:20 AM
                    > To: arrl-lotw@yahoogroups.com
                    > Subject: [ARRL-LOTW] Re%3A%20Duplicate%20Wars
                    >
                    >
                    > Do the certificates have to expire?
                    >
                    > John N2YP
                    >
                    > ________________________________________
                    > No virus found in this message.
                    > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                    > Version: 10.0.1430 / Virus Database: 2637/5508 - Release Date: 01/03/13
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > ------------------------------------
                    >
                    > Yahoo! Groups Links
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    > ------------------------------------
                    >
                    > Yahoo! Groups Links
                    >
                    >
                    >
                    >
                  • VE6LB
                    Maybe for the 28K USA users. The 30K ROW just renew with no proof of license after the initial certificate. I’ve renewed my 20+ certificates (calls) since
                    Message 9 of 21 , Jan 4, 2013
                    • 0 Attachment
                       
                      Maybe for the 28K USA users. The 30K ROW just renew with no proof of license after the initial certificate.
                      I’ve renewed my 20+ certificates (calls) since day 1. Only my initial certificate required a proof of license.
                       
                      Gerry VE6LB
                       
                      Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 9:08 AM
                      Subject: Re: [ARRL-LOTW] Re%3A%20Duplicate%20Wars
                       
                       


                      On 1/4/2013 10:58 AM, Mark Robinson wrote:
                      > I wish they didn't..it is a royal pita.

                      It would still need to expire on the expiration date of the license.
                      Part of the philosophy is related to certifying a valid license.

                      73,

                      ... Joe, W4TV

                      On 1/4/2013 10:58 AM, Mark Robinson wrote:
                      > I wish they didn't..it is a royal pita. It is bad enough getting this
                      > stuff to work the first time around,, let alone having to repeat the pain
                      >
                      > Mark N1UK
                      >
                      > ----- Original Message -----
                      > From: "Dave AA6YQ" mailto:aa6yq%40ambersoft.com>
                      > To: mailto:ARRL-LOTW%40yahoogroups.com>
                      > Sent: Friday, 04 January, 2013 2:20 AM
                      > Subject: RE: [ARRL-LOTW] Re%3A%20Duplicate%20Wars
                      >
                      >
                      > My understanding is that as a matter of ARRL Management policy, "yes".
                      >
                      > 73,
                      >
                      > Dave, AA6YQ
                      >
                      > From: mailto:ARRL-LOTW%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:ARRL-LOTW%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
                      > Of John Rudolph
                      > Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 2:20 AM
                      > To: mailto:arrl-lotw%40yahoogroups.com
                      > Subject: [ARRL-LOTW] Re%3A%20Duplicate%20Wars
                      >
                      >
                      > Do the certificates have to expire?
                      >
                      > John N2YP
                      >
                      > ________________________________________
                      > No virus found in this message.
                      > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                      > Version: 10.0.1430 / Virus Database: 2637/5508 - Release Date: 01/03/13
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > ------------------------------------
                      >
                      > Yahoo! Groups Links
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      > ------------------------------------
                      >
                      > Yahoo! Groups Links
                      >
                      >
                      >
                      >

                    • Frank T Brady
                      Joe, I should have said notify the user rather than pop-up messages Server processing of uploaded logs is a batch process. But, If LOTW-tQSL interaction
                      Message 10 of 21 , Jan 4, 2013
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Joe,
                        I should have said "notify the user" rather than "pop-up messages"
                        Server processing of uploaded logs is a batch process.
                        But, If LOTW-tQSL interaction were implemented, the status and notification functions would be interactive and event driven.
                        e.g.,
                        LOTW encounters a problem the user should know about.
                        It tells tQSL and tQSL reminds the user that status is available - just like a mail client displays a "you have mail" bubble
                        The status would be available when the user executes tQSL and queries that status.
                        What's not to like?
                        73, Frank w0ecs




                        On 1/4/2013 10:11 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
                         


                        > Why cant tQSL and LOTW communicate and notify the user with pop up
                        > messages?

                        Unfortunately, pop-up messages don't work in a batch processing
                        environment and that is what we have with uploads being processed
                        up to 12 days after the upload! Putting the information currently
                        written to the users' "results" file into an email message would
                        be the most convenient way to communicate it.

                        By sending an e-mail the user most likely sees it rather than the
                        information getting lost in a place most users never go.

                        73,

                        ... Joe, W4TV

                        On 1/4/2013 7:51 AM, Frank T Brady wrote:
                        > I don't like the idea of adding email to the loop at all.
                        >
                        > Why cant tQSL and LOTW communicate and notify the user with pop up
                        > messages?
                        >
                        > 73, Frank w0ecs
                        >
                        >
                        >
                        > On 1/4/2013 2:26 AM, John Rudolph wrote:
                        >>
                        >>
                        >> I still don't like the idea of having to confirm the email every time.
                        >> I do like having to reenter your email if it bounces or when there is
                        >> an issue with your uploads and you don't respond to league emails that
                        >> you cant upload until the email issue is fixed. This should include
                        >> when you use a logger.
                        >>
                        >> John N2YP
                        >>
                        >
                        >


                      • NUNO LOPES
                        Same here Gerry,  First one in snail mail to ARRL, then just TQ.6 by email.   73 de Nuno   CT2IRY ... license after the initial certificate. ... certificate
                        Message 11 of 21 , Jan 4, 2013
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Same here Gerry, 
                          First one in snail mail to ARRL, then just TQ.6 by email.
                           
                          73 de Nuno
                            CT2IRY


                          From: VE6LB <ve6lb@...>
                          To: ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com
                          Sent: Friday, January 4, 2013 4:32 PM
                          Subject: Re: [ARRL-LOTW] Re%3A%20Duplicate%20Wars

                           
                           
                          Maybe for the 28K USA users. The 30K ROW just renew with no proof of license after the initial certificate.
                          I’ve renewed my 20+ certificates (calls) since day 1. Only my initial certificate required a proof of license.
                           
                          Gerry VE6LB
                           
                          Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 9:08 AM
                          Subject: Re: [ARRL-LOTW] Re%3A%20Duplicate%20Wars
                           
                           

                          On 1/4/2013 10:58 AM, Mark Robinson wrote:
                          > I wish they didn't..it is a royal pita.

                          It would still need to expire on the expiration date of the license.
                          Part of the philosophy is related to certifying a valid license.

                          73,

                          ... Joe, W4TV

                          On 1/4/2013 10:58 AM, Mark Robinson wrote:
                          > I wish they didn't..it is a royal pita. It is bad enough getting this
                          > stuff to work the first time around,, let alone having to repeat the pain
                          >
                          > Mark N1UK
                          >
                          > ----- Original Message -----
                          > From: "Dave AA6YQ" mailto:aa6yq%40ambersoft.com>
                          > To: mailto:ARRL-LOTW%40yahoogroups.com>
                          > Sent: Friday, 04 January, 2013 2:20 AM
                          > Subject: RE: [ARRL-LOTW] Re%3A%20Duplicate%20Wars
                          >
                          >
                          > My understanding is that as a matter of ARRL Management policy, "yes".
                          >
                          > 73,
                          >
                          > Dave, AA6YQ
                          >
                          > From: mailto:ARRL-LOTW%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:mailto:ARRL-LOTW%40yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
                          > Of John Rudolph
                          > Sent: Friday, January 04, 2013 2:20 AM
                          > To: mailto:arrl-lotw%40yahoogroups.com
                          > Subject: [ARRL-LOTW] Re%3A%20Duplicate%20Wars
                          >
                          >
                          > Do the certificates have to expire?
                          >
                          > John N2YP
                          >
                          > ________________________________________
                          > No virus found in this message.
                          > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                          > Version: 10.0.1430 / Virus Database: 2637/5508 - Release Date: 01/03/13
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > ------------------------------------
                          >
                          > Yahoo! Groups Links
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > ------------------------------------
                          >
                          > Yahoo! Groups Links
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >


                        • Joe Subich, W4TV
                          ... I like *anything* that improves feedback between LotW and the user - particularly if it can chide the user about duplicate uploads ! However, LotW
                          Message 12 of 21 , Jan 4, 2013
                          • 0 Attachment
                            > What's not to like?

                            I like *anything* that improves feedback between LotW and the user
                            - particularly if it can chide the user about duplicate uploads <G>!

                            However, LotW notify tQSL, tQSL display a message to the user would
                            require significant server side changes to support an interactive
                            process between tQSL and the server every time tQSL is started as
                            well as requiring an entirely new message handling capability in tQSL.
                            That's a substantial increase in complexity compared to sending the
                            current "results" report to an e-mail address contained in the input
                            file.

                            73,

                            ... Joe, W4TV


                            On 1/4/2013 11:33 AM, Frank T Brady wrote:
                            > Joe,
                            > I should have said "notify the user" rather than "pop-up messages"
                            > Server processing of uploaded logs is a batch process.
                            > But, If LOTW-tQSL interaction were implemented, the status and
                            > notification functions would be interactive and event driven.
                            > e.g.,
                            > LOTW encounters a problem the user should know about.
                            > It tells tQSL and tQSL reminds the user that status is available - just
                            > like a mail client displays a "you have mail" bubble
                            > The status would be available when the user executes tQSL and queries
                            > that status.
                            > What's not to like?
                            > 73, Frank w0ecs
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            >
                            > On 1/4/2013 10:11 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
                            >>
                            >>
                            >> > Why cant tQSL and LOTW communicate and notify the user with pop up
                            >> > messages?
                            >>
                            >> Unfortunately, pop-up messages don't work in a batch processing
                            >> environment and that is what we have with uploads being processed
                            >> up to 12 days after the upload! Putting the information currently
                            >> written to the users' "results" file into an email message would
                            >> be the most convenient way to communicate it.
                            >>
                            >> By sending an e-mail the user most likely sees it rather than the
                            >> information getting lost in a place most users never go.
                            >>
                            >> 73,
                            >>
                            >> ... Joe, W4TV
                            >>
                            >> On 1/4/2013 7:51 AM, Frank T Brady wrote:
                            >> > I don't like the idea of adding email to the loop at all.
                            >> >
                            >> > Why cant tQSL and LOTW communicate and notify the user with pop up
                            >> > messages?
                            >> >
                            >> > 73, Frank w0ecs
                            >> >
                            >> >
                            >> >
                            >> > On 1/4/2013 2:26 AM, John Rudolph wrote:
                            >> >>
                            >> >>
                            >> >> I still don't like the idea of having to confirm the email every time.
                            >> >> I do like having to reenter your email if it bounces or when there is
                            >> >> an issue with your uploads and you don't respond to league emails that
                            >> >> you cant upload until the email issue is fixed. This should include
                            >> >> when you use a logger.
                            >> >>
                            >> >> John N2YP
                            >> >>
                            >> >
                            >> >
                            >>
                            >>
                            >
                            >
                          • NUNO LOPES
                            Hi, I think that providing an valid email, and sent the reports to that email, it s enough. I check my email a few times a day, like many users, so I think
                            Message 13 of 21 , Jan 4, 2013
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Hi,
                              I think that providing an valid email, and sent the reports to that email, it's enough.
                              I check my email a few times a day, like many users, so I think that is no need to make it more complex.
                              Like when you upload to ClubLog, you get an email with the feedback of the upload.
                               
                              73 de Nuno
                                CT2IRY


                              From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@...>
                              To: ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com
                              Sent: Friday, January 4, 2013 4:49 PM
                              Subject: Re: [ARRL-LOTW] Re%3A%20Duplicate%20Wars

                               

                              > What's not to like?

                              I like *anything* that improves feedback between LotW and the user
                              - particularly if it can chide the user about duplicate uploads !

                              However, LotW notify tQSL, tQSL display a message to the user would
                              require significant server side changes to support an interactive
                              process between tQSL and the server every time tQSL is started as
                              well as requiring an entirely new message handling capability in tQSL.
                              That's a substantial increase in complexity compared to sending the
                              current "results" report to an e-mail address contained in the input
                              file.

                              73,

                              ... Joe, W4TV

                              On 1/4/2013 11:33 AM, Frank T Brady wrote:
                              > Joe,
                              > I should have said "notify the user" rather than "pop-up messages"
                              > Server processing of uploaded logs is a batch process.
                              > But, If LOTW-tQSL interaction were implemented, the status and
                              > notification functions would be interactive and event driven.
                              > e.g.,
                              > LOTW encounters a problem the user should know about.
                              > It tells tQSL and tQSL reminds the user that status is available - just
                              > like a mail client displays a "you have mail" bubble
                              > The status would be available when the user executes tQSL and queries
                              > that status.
                              > What's not to like?
                              > 73, Frank w0ecs
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > On 1/4/2013 10:11 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
                              >>
                              >>
                              >> > Why cant tQSL and LOTW communicate and notify the user with pop up
                              >> > messages?
                              >>
                              >> Unfortunately, pop-up messages don't work in a batch processing
                              >> environment and that is what we have with uploads being processed
                              >> up to 12 days after the upload! Putting the information currently
                              >> written to the users' "results" file into an email message would
                              >> be the most convenient way to communicate it.
                              >>
                              >> By sending an e-mail the user most likely sees it rather than the
                              >> information getting lost in a place most users never go.
                              >>
                              >> 73,
                              >>
                              >> ... Joe, W4TV
                              >>
                              >> On 1/4/2013 7:51 AM, Frank T Brady wrote:
                              >> > I don't like the idea of adding email to the loop at all.
                              >> >
                              >> > Why cant tQSL and LOTW communicate and notify the user with pop up
                              >> > messages?
                              >> >
                              >> > 73, Frank w0ecs
                              >> >
                              >> >
                              >> >
                              >> > On 1/4/2013 2:26 AM, John Rudolph wrote:
                              >> >>
                              >> >>
                              >> >> I still don't like the idea of having to confirm the email every time.
                              >> >> I do like having to reenter your email if it bounces or when there is
                              >> >> an issue with your uploads and you don't respond to league emails that
                              >> >> you cant upload until the email issue is fixed. This should include
                              >> >> when you use a logger.
                              >> >>
                              >> >> John N2YP
                              >> >>
                              >> >
                              >> >
                              >>
                              >>
                              >
                              >


                            • Tim
                              ... I have a certificate for a callsign I had 30+ years ago, in addition to my current callsign. I never had my license actually lapse, but I think that they
                              Message 14 of 21 , Jan 4, 2013
                              • 0 Attachment
                                --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, "Joe Subich, W4TV" wrote:
                                > It would still need to expire on the expiration date of the license.
                                > Part of the philosophy is related to certifying a valid license.

                                I have a certificate for a callsign I had 30+ years ago, in addition to my current callsign. I never had my license actually lapse, but I think that they will give you a certificate for an old callsign even if there was a lapse in between calls.

                                Perhaps you mean, the "valid QSO dates for the certificate". I think LOTW certificates support that concept. Even then, I think it would be a real PITA if certificates auto-expired on license expiration date, most folks will renew their callsign by the expiration date and it would be a shame if they needed a new certificate just for that event. At least US licenses are good for 10 years.

                                Tim N3QE
                              • Peter Laws
                                ... With good instructions, there is little pain now, likewise with renewals. The TQSL enhancements AA6YQ talks about will (hopefully) make even the good
                                Message 15 of 21 , Jan 4, 2013
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 9:58 AM, Mark Robinson <markrob@...> wrote:
                                  > I wish they didn't..it is a royal pita. It is bad enough getting this
                                  > stuff to work the first time around,, let alone having to repeat the pain

                                  With good instructions, there is little pain now, likewise with renewals.

                                  The TQSL enhancements AA6YQ talks about will (hopefully) make even the
                                  "good instructions" optional.


                                  --
                                  Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!
                                • Peter Laws
                                  ... You don t need to prove you have a license to renew in US/FCC areas either. Any pain is mostly self-inflicted IMNSHO. -- Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws
                                  Message 16 of 21 , Jan 4, 2013
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 10:32 AM, VE6LB <ve6lb@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > Maybe for the 28K USA users. The 30K ROW just renew with no proof of license after the initial certificate.
                                    > I’ve renewed my 20+ certificates (calls) since day 1. Only my initial certificate required a proof of license.

                                    You don't need to prove you have a license to renew in US/FCC areas
                                    either. Any "pain" is mostly self-inflicted IMNSHO.



                                    --
                                    Peter Laws | N5UWY | plaws plaws net | Travel by Train!
                                  • Frank T Brady
                                    Joe, The way I see it, as long as both software realms are being modified (*extensively*) interactive user notification sure seems worthwhile. It s no more
                                    Message 17 of 21 , Jan 4, 2013
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      Joe,
                                      The way I see it, as long as both software realms are being modified (*extensively*) interactive user notification sure seems worthwhile.
                                      It's no more complex than parts of the LOTW interface code that *many* hams have coded up - and the capability would allow ongoing enhancements that would give it the user friendliness we've all missed in the original implementation.
                                      Just sayin....
                                      73, frank w0ecs

                                      On 1/4/2013 11:49 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
                                       


                                      > What's not to like?

                                      I like *anything* that improves feedback between LotW and the user
                                      - particularly if it can chide the user about duplicate uploads !

                                      However, LotW notify tQSL, tQSL display a message to the user would
                                      require significant server side changes to support an interactive
                                      process between tQSL and the server every time tQSL is started as
                                      well as requiring an entirely new message handling capability in tQSL.
                                      That's a substantial increase in complexity compared to sending the
                                      current "results" report to an e-mail address contained in the input
                                      file.

                                      73,

                                      ... Joe, W4TV

                                      On 1/4/2013 11:33 AM, Frank T Brady wrote:
                                      > Joe,
                                      > I should have said "notify the user" rather than "pop-up messages"
                                      > Server processing of uploaded logs is a batch process.
                                      > But, If LOTW-tQSL interaction were implemented, the status and
                                      > notification functions would be interactive and event driven.
                                      > e.g.,
                                      > LOTW encounters a problem the user should know about.
                                      > It tells tQSL and tQSL reminds the user that status is available - just
                                      > like a mail client displays a "you have mail" bubble
                                      > The status would be available when the user executes tQSL and queries
                                      > that status.
                                      > What's not to like?
                                      > 73, Frank w0ecs
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > On 1/4/2013 10:11 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
                                      >>
                                      >>
                                      >> > Why cant tQSL and LOTW communicate and notify the user with pop up
                                      >> > messages?
                                      >>
                                      >> Unfortunately, pop-up messages don't work in a batch processing
                                      >> environment and that is what we have with uploads being processed
                                      >> up to 12 days after the upload! Putting the information currently
                                      >> written to the users' "results" file into an email message would
                                      >> be the most convenient way to communicate it.
                                      >>
                                      >> By sending an e-mail the user most likely sees it rather than the
                                      >> information getting lost in a place most users never go.
                                      >>
                                      >> 73,
                                      >>
                                      >> ... Joe, W4TV
                                      >>
                                      >> On 1/4/2013 7:51 AM, Frank T Brady wrote:
                                      >> > I don't like the idea of adding email to the loop at all.
                                      >> >
                                      >> > Why cant tQSL and LOTW communicate and notify the user with pop up
                                      >> > messages?
                                      >> >
                                      >> > 73, Frank w0ecs
                                      >> >
                                      >> >
                                      >> >
                                      >> > On 1/4/2013 2:26 AM, John Rudolph wrote:
                                      >> >>
                                      >> >>
                                      >> >> I still don't like the idea of having to confirm the email every time.
                                      >> >> I do like having to reenter your email if it bounces or when there is
                                      >> >> an issue with your uploads and you don't respond to league emails that
                                      >> >> you cant upload until the email issue is fixed. This should include
                                      >> >> when you use a logger.
                                      >> >>
                                      >> >> John N2YP
                                      >> >>
                                      >> >
                                      >> >
                                      >>
                                      >>
                                      >
                                      >


                                    • Joe Subich, W4TV
                                      ... The point is that the server is not being modified extensively - at least that it the plan. Sending results as an e-mail is a minor change - supporting
                                      Message 18 of 21 , Jan 4, 2013
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        On 1/4/2013 12:53 PM, Frank T Brady wrote:
                                        > The way I see it, as long as both software realms are being modified
                                        > (*extensively*) interactive user notification sure seems worthwhile.

                                        The point is that the server is not being modified extensively - at
                                        least that it the plan. Sending results as an e-mail is a minor
                                        change - supporting interactivity, a much higher hurdle.

                                        73,

                                        ... Joe, W4TV


                                        On 1/4/2013 12:53 PM, Frank T Brady wrote:
                                        > Joe,
                                        > The way I see it, as long as both software realms are being modified
                                        > (*extensively*) interactive user notification sure seems worthwhile.
                                        > It's no more complex than parts of the LOTW interface code that *many*
                                        > hams have coded up - and the capability would allow ongoing enhancements
                                        > that would give it the user friendliness we've all missed in the
                                        > original implementation.
                                        > Just sayin....
                                        > 73, frank w0ecs
                                        >
                                        > On 1/4/2013 11:49 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
                                        >>
                                        >>
                                        >> > What's not to like?
                                        >>
                                        >> I like *anything* that improves feedback between LotW and the user
                                        >> - particularly if it can chide the user about duplicate uploads !
                                        >>
                                        >> However, LotW notify tQSL, tQSL display a message to the user would
                                        >> require significant server side changes to support an interactive
                                        >> process between tQSL and the server every time tQSL is started as
                                        >> well as requiring an entirely new message handling capability in tQSL.
                                        >> That's a substantial increase in complexity compared to sending the
                                        >> current "results" report to an e-mail address contained in the input
                                        >> file.
                                        >>
                                        >> 73,
                                        >>
                                        >> ... Joe, W4TV
                                        >>
                                        >> On 1/4/2013 11:33 AM, Frank T Brady wrote:
                                        >> > Joe,
                                        >> > I should have said "notify the user" rather than "pop-up messages"
                                        >> > Server processing of uploaded logs is a batch process.
                                        >> > But, If LOTW-tQSL interaction were implemented, the status and
                                        >> > notification functions would be interactive and event driven.
                                        >> > e.g.,
                                        >> > LOTW encounters a problem the user should know about.
                                        >> > It tells tQSL and tQSL reminds the user that status is available - just
                                        >> > like a mail client displays a "you have mail" bubble
                                        >> > The status would be available when the user executes tQSL and queries
                                        >> > that status.
                                        >> > What's not to like?
                                        >> > 73, Frank w0ecs
                                        >> >
                                        >> >
                                        >> >
                                        >> >
                                        >> > On 1/4/2013 10:11 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
                                        >> >>
                                        >> >>
                                        >> >> > Why cant tQSL and LOTW communicate and notify the user with pop up
                                        >> >> > messages?
                                        >> >>
                                        >> >> Unfortunately, pop-up messages don't work in a batch processing
                                        >> >> environment and that is what we have with uploads being processed
                                        >> >> up to 12 days after the upload! Putting the information currently
                                        >> >> written to the users' "results" file into an email message would
                                        >> >> be the most convenient way to communicate it.
                                        >> >>
                                        >> >> By sending an e-mail the user most likely sees it rather than the
                                        >> >> information getting lost in a place most users never go.
                                        >> >>
                                        >> >> 73,
                                        >> >>
                                        >> >> ... Joe, W4TV
                                        >> >>
                                        >> >> On 1/4/2013 7:51 AM, Frank T Brady wrote:
                                        >> >> > I don't like the idea of adding email to the loop at all.
                                        >> >> >
                                        >> >> > Why cant tQSL and LOTW communicate and notify the user with pop up
                                        >> >> > messages?
                                        >> >> >
                                        >> >> > 73, Frank w0ecs
                                        >> >> >
                                        >> >> >
                                        >> >> >
                                        >> >> > On 1/4/2013 2:26 AM, John Rudolph wrote:
                                        >> >> >>
                                        >> >> >>
                                        >> >> >> I still don't like the idea of having to confirm the email every
                                        >> time.
                                        >> >> >> I do like having to reenter your email if it bounces or when
                                        >> there is
                                        >> >> >> an issue with your uploads and you don't respond to league
                                        >> emails that
                                        >> >> >> you cant upload until the email issue is fixed. This should include
                                        >> >> >> when you use a logger.
                                        >> >> >>
                                        >> >> >> John N2YP
                                        >> >> >>
                                        >> >> >
                                        >> >> >
                                        >> >>
                                        >> >>
                                        >> >
                                        >> >
                                        >>
                                        >>
                                        >
                                        >
                                      • Dave AA6YQ
                                        As part of improving TQSL s usability, making renewals less painful is on the list . 73, Dave, AA6YQ
                                        Message 19 of 21 , Jan 4, 2013
                                        • 0 Attachment

                                          As part of improving TQSL’s usability, making renewals less painful is “on the list”.

                                           

                                               73,

                                           

                                                    Dave, AA6YQ

                                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.