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

RE: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: /p /m stations logging

Expand Messages
  • Gary Hinson
    FWIW My responsibility is (a) to identify myself on air with the official callsign assigned to me by the licensing authorities, according to my legally-binding
    Message 1 of 15 , Feb 20, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      FWIW

      My responsibility is (a) to identify myself on air with the official
      callsign assigned to me by the licensing authorities, according to my
      legally-binding license terms and conditions such as the frequency with
      which I ID, use of phonetics, permitted use of prefixes and suffixes etc.;
      and (b) to log whatever callsign the other guy sends to me in QSO over the
      air, accurately and completely, asking for repeats if I'm not sure.

      I accept no responsibility for second-guessing the other guy's license terms
      and conditions. If he IDs using the callsign "XY99XY/5W/QRP/M" I will log
      it just so. I have NO IDEA what the laws in XY-land say about callsigns and
      suffixes. I can't tell whether he is or is not legally licensed, or if that
      is or is not a legitimate way for him to ID. I really don't care that much
      (piracy aside) - his ID is his responsibility not mine. I DO care about
      complying with my own licensing laws, which is why I refuse to adjust calls
      by arbitrarily removing, adding or changing any modifiers.

      I understand that I need not necessarily send a copy of what is recorded in
      my official log to LoTW, but I would feel distinctly uncomfortable about
      sending anything different, in terms of both my own call as transmitted
      (including any prefixes and suffixes I sent as an integral part of my call
      i.e. separated from my allocated callsign by the slash character, not by a
      space) and the other parties' calls as received (including their prefixes
      and suffixes as sent in the same way).

      I further understand that if the other guy takes it on himself not to submit
      both his and my calls as sent over the air to LoTW, we will not get a match.
      I can live with that, though one of us might be a bit annoyed if it was a
      new one!

      However, if LoTW declares a match using whatever rules it applies, then it
      is an LoTW match. It's their game, their rules. If ARRL decides to relax
      the match-making, so be it.

      Just sayin'

      73
      Gary ZL2iFB

      > -----Original Message-----
      > From: ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ARRL-
      > LOTW@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
      > Sent: Thursday, 21 February 2013 4:31 p.m.
      > To: ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: Re: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: /p /m stations logging
      >
      >
      > > Joe, I don't understand your comment. Can you give me an example?
      >
      > I'm guessing at your real question ...
      >
      > In most DXCC "countries" the callsign either a native call like DL1ABC or
      a CEPT
      > call like DL/W4TV is required - there is no doubt based on the call used
      on the
      > air that it is either in Germany or a pirate.
      >
      > However, in the US and territories W4TV could e legally be operated from
      > any one of 17 DXCC "countries." Similarly a FO callsign could be
      operating
      > from any one of four DXCC "countries", a VP8 could be in any one of six
      > "countries", etc.
      >
      > Where the "identifier" is legally required it should not be ignored by
      LotW -
      > e.g., OA4/PA3GFE and PA3GFE should not be matched by LotW even though
      > OA4/PA3GFE often uses PA3GFE when working JT65 and signs OA4/PA3GFE
      > 73 in his final transmission.
      >
      > If a station uses a "DXCC Prefix" on the air - e.g. KP4/W4TV - and uploads
      his
      > logs with the DXCC Prefix, logs uploaded without the prefix (or suffix as
      in
      > the case of W4TV/VE2) should not match.
      > Simply, the "other" station did not copy the call correctly. The same
      standard
      > should be applied to those who would log KH7XS (in
      > Florida) as W4/KH7XS - it is a "busted call" and should not count.
      >
      > 73,
      >
      > ... Joe, W4TV
      >
      >
      > On 2/20/2013 9:48 PM, Robert Chudek - K0RC wrote:
      > > What I think is getting mixed up in the discussion is the distinction
      > > between what meets legal requirements on the air and whether these
      > > qualifiers are necessary for LoTW to perform QSO matching.
      > >
      > > My point is that just because an on-air requirement (legal
      > > requirement) might dictate how you attach qualifiers to your root call
      > > sign, this doesn't require the LoTW QSO matching routine to follow that
      > example.
      > > Your root call remains constant. LoTW uses other methods (certificates
      > > and station locations) to determine where the QSO took place. So I
      > > contend the on-air qualifiers are irrelevant (for QSO matching
      purposes).
      > >
      > > Maybe my statement below below would have been 'more correct' if I had
      > > said "What you used on the air does not validate your QTH as far as
      > > LoTW is concerned".
      > >
      > > Joe, I don't understand your comment. Can you give me an example?
      > >
      > > 73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
      > >
      > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
      > > -- On 2/20/2013 7:22 AM, Robert Galambos wrote:
      > >>
      > >> lets be completely correct here. for those who do not know. the below
      > >> statement is true EXCEPT when US amateurs are working in Canada and
      > >> visa a versa
      > >>
      > >> according to Reciprocal Operating Agreement treaty. when one
      > >> operating in the other country the location need to be at the END of
      > >> the call, instead of the beginning.
      > >>
      > >> in other words, as a holder of a Canadian ticket working in Michigan
      > >> my call would be VA3BXG/W8 and for a US ticket operating in ONT it
      > >> would be (as an example) N1PAB/VE3
      > >>
      > >> 2013-02-20 1:18 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
      > >>>
      > >>>
      > >>> > What you used on the air does not validate your QTH, the
      > >>> > certificate does. This is the case for operating from different DXCC
      > Entities.
      > >>>
      > >>> Only if you are talking about areas within the US and US Territories
      > >>> as well as specific areas like FO, VP8, E5, 3D2, and JD1 where one
      > >>> prefix is used in multiple "countries." Otherwise the Prefix/Call,
      > >>> in fact, does define the "country."
      > >>>
      > >>> SNIP
      > >>>
      > >>
      > >>
      > >
      > >
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >


      --
      This message has been scanned for viruses and
      dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
      believed to be clean.
    • Gary Hinson
      I m currently updating my log to for DXCC credits recently received. Whereas LoTW retains suffixes such as /P on QSOs I have uploaded, the DXCC records appear
      Message 2 of 15 , Feb 28, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        I'm currently updating my log to for DXCC credits recently received.
        Whereas LoTW retains suffixes such as /P on QSOs I have uploaded, the DXCC
        records appear to have dropped the suffixes.

        For example, my log shows a QSO with "UA6AF/P", matched and confirmed on
        LoTW as "UA6AF/P" but plain "UA6AF" was credited for DXCC/CW.

        73
        Gary ZL2iFB



        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: Gary Hinson [mailto:Gary@...]
        > Sent: Thursday, 21 February 2013 5:29 p.m.
        > To: 'ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com'
        > Subject: RE: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: /p /m stations logging
        >
        > FWIW
        >
        > My responsibility is (a) to identify myself on air with the official
        callsign
        > assigned to me by the licensing authorities, according to my
        legally-binding
        > license terms and conditions such as the frequency with which I ID, use of
        > phonetics, permitted use of prefixes and suffixes etc.; and (b) to log
        > whatever callsign the other guy sends to me in QSO over the air,
        accurately
        > and completely, asking for repeats if I'm not sure.
        >
        > I accept no responsibility for second-guessing the other guy's license
        terms
        > and conditions. If he IDs using the callsign "XY99XY/5W/QRP/M" I will
        log it
        > just so. I have NO IDEA what the laws in XY-land say about callsigns and
        > suffixes. I can't tell whether he is or is not legally licensed, or if
        that is or is
        > not a legitimate way for him to ID. I really don't care that much (piracy
        aside)
        > - his ID is his responsibility not mine. I DO care about complying with
        my
        > own licensing laws, which is why I refuse to adjust calls by arbitrarily
        > removing, adding or changing any modifiers.
        >
        > I understand that I need not necessarily send a copy of what is recorded
        in
        > my official log to LoTW, but I would feel distinctly uncomfortable about
        > sending anything different, in terms of both my own call as transmitted
        > (including any prefixes and suffixes I sent as an integral part of my call
        i.e.
        > separated from my allocated callsign by the slash character, not by a
        space)
        > and the other parties' calls as received (including their prefixes and
        suffixes
        > as sent in the same way).
        >
        > I further understand that if the other guy takes it on himself not to
        submit
        > both his and my calls as sent over the air to LoTW, we will not get a
        match. I
        > can live with that, though one of us might be a bit annoyed if it was a
        new
        > one!
        >
        > However, if LoTW declares a match using whatever rules it applies, then it
        is
        > an LoTW match. It's their game, their rules. If ARRL decides to relax
        the
        > match-making, so be it.
        >
        > Just sayin'
        >
        > 73
        > Gary ZL2iFB
        >
        > > -----Original Message-----
        > > From: ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com [mailto:ARRL-
        > LOTW@yahoogroups.com] On
        > > Behalf Of Joe Subich, W4TV
        > > Sent: Thursday, 21 February 2013 4:31 p.m.
        > > To: ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com
        > > Subject: Re: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: /p /m stations logging
        > >
        > >
        > > > Joe, I don't understand your comment. Can you give me an example?
        > >
        > > I'm guessing at your real question ...
        > >
        > > In most DXCC "countries" the callsign either a native call like DL1ABC
        > > or a CEPT call like DL/W4TV is required - there is no doubt based on
        > > the call used on the air that it is either in Germany or a pirate.
        > >
        > > However, in the US and territories W4TV could e legally be operated
        > > from any one of 17 DXCC "countries." Similarly a FO callsign could be
        > > operating from any one of four DXCC "countries", a VP8 could be in any
        > > one of six "countries", etc.
        > >
        > > Where the "identifier" is legally required it should not be ignored by
        > > LotW - e.g., OA4/PA3GFE and PA3GFE should not be matched by LotW
        > even
        > > though OA4/PA3GFE often uses PA3GFE when working JT65 and signs
        > > OA4/PA3GFE
        > > 73 in his final transmission.
        > >
        > > If a station uses a "DXCC Prefix" on the air - e.g. KP4/W4TV - and
        > > uploads his logs with the DXCC Prefix, logs uploaded without the
        > > prefix (or suffix as in the case of W4TV/VE2) should not match.
        > > Simply, the "other" station did not copy the call correctly. The same
        > > standard should be applied to those who would log KH7XS (in
        > > Florida) as W4/KH7XS - it is a "busted call" and should not count.
        > >
        > > 73,
        > >
        > > ... Joe, W4TV
        > >
        > >
        > > On 2/20/2013 9:48 PM, Robert Chudek - K0RC wrote:
        > > > What I think is getting mixed up in the discussion is the
        > > > distinction between what meets legal requirements on the air and
        > > > whether these qualifiers are necessary for LoTW to perform QSO
        > matching.
        > > >
        > > > My point is that just because an on-air requirement (legal
        > > > requirement) might dictate how you attach qualifiers to your root
        > > > call sign, this doesn't require the LoTW QSO matching routine to
        > > > follow that
        > > example.
        > > > Your root call remains constant. LoTW uses other methods
        > > > (certificates and station locations) to determine where the QSO took
        > > > place. So I contend the on-air qualifiers are irrelevant (for QSO
        matching
        > purposes).
        > > >
        > > > Maybe my statement below below would have been 'more correct' if I
        > > > had said "What you used on the air does not validate your QTH as far
        > > > as LoTW is concerned".
        > > >
        > > > Joe, I don't understand your comment. Can you give me an example?
        > > >
        > > > 73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
        > > >
        > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------
        > > > --
        > > > -- On 2/20/2013 7:22 AM, Robert Galambos wrote:
        > > >>
        > > >> lets be completely correct here. for those who do not know. the
        > > >> below statement is true EXCEPT when US amateurs are working in
        > > >> Canada and visa a versa
        > > >>
        > > >> according to Reciprocal Operating Agreement treaty. when one
        > > >> operating in the other country the location need to be at the END
        > > >> of the call, instead of the beginning.
        > > >>
        > > >> in other words, as a holder of a Canadian ticket working in
        > > >> Michigan my call would be VA3BXG/W8 and for a US ticket operating
        > > >> in ONT it would be (as an example) N1PAB/VE3
        > > >>
        > > >> 2013-02-20 1:18 AM, Joe Subich, W4TV wrote:
        > > >>>
        > > >>>
        > > >>> > What you used on the air does not validate your QTH, the
        > > >>> > certificate does. This is the case for operating from different
        > > >>> > DXCC
        > > Entities.
        > > >>>
        > > >>> Only if you are talking about areas within the US and US
        > > >>> Territories as well as specific areas like FO, VP8, E5, 3D2, and
        > > >>> JD1 where one prefix is used in multiple "countries." Otherwise
        > > >>> the Prefix/Call, in fact, does define the "country."
        > > >>>
        > > >>> SNIP
        > > >>>
        > > >>
        > > >>
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        > >
        > > ------------------------------------
        > >
        > > Yahoo! Groups Links
        > >
        > >
        > >


        --
        This message has been scanned for viruses and
        dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
        believed to be clean.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.