I'm a 160 meter DXCC card checker...so I thought I would respond to this. First of all let me say that the DXCC card checkers really need to have an updated manual so that all card checkers have the same understanding and there is a reference to refer to. As far as I know there is none although NC1L said he was working on a new one before he had his accident. The qualifications for being a 160 meter card checker are simply being appointed as a card checker and also having a 160 meter DXCC. (Not all card checkers have a 160 meter DXCC. If they do not, they cannot check 160 meter cards.)
My understanding of what I'm supposed to do when I check a 160 meter card is to simply write the time that is on the card on the check sheet. Our job as card checkers is not to decide whether a card is good or not but to confirm that the information that is reported is accurate. However, if we have a suspicion that a card is not good, we note it on the check sheet....but let the ARRL DXCC personnel make the final decision. That's what I do; others may have a different understanding. 73, Greg-N4CC -----Original Message----- From: Topband <topband-boun...@contesting.com> On Behalf Of w...@w5zn.org Sent: Monday, November 19, 2018 3:21 PM To: topband <topband@contesting.com> Subject: Re: Topband: ARRL DXCC - 160 Meters I haven't really followed the 160 meter DXCC card checking process closely since I retired from ARRL elected volunteer service almost 10 years ago and after my good friend Dave NN1N departed I lost any real inquiry opportunity other than a "regular" member would have ":-))" so I have no clue what the current procedure is for a DXCC Field Checker to validate 160 meter DXCC cards. Regardless, as Jeff ZM urges, drop a note to the DXCC desk at HQ and also maybe your ARRL Director (please don't bug a Director in another Division, bug yours!). I would expect it to be investigated if enough folks raise the issue. 73 Joel W5ZN On 2018-11-17 08:08, Bill Tippett wrote: >>> "There have been no uploads for OK1YQ therefore it all has to be >>> cards. 73 > > Clive GM3POI" > > > Thanks Clive. I was under the mistaken impression that ARRL had > closed > > the previous loopholes in their paper card process but that is clearly > not > > the case. This (paper cheating on 160 cards) has been going on since > at > > least the late 1980s, so I thought the process would have been > corrected > > by now. Something as simple as "IF 160 total is in the Top X, > crosscheck > > with someone knowledgeable about 160" (even a past or current ARRL > President > > would do...LOL). I don't know what the qualifications are for "160 > certified" > > log checkers but this may need to be reviewed. > > > I was also not intending to cast any aspersions about the integrity of > > LOTW, but as we've seen in the news the past few years, ANYTHING > connected > > to the Internet is subject to hacks. I'm sure ARRL will be > investigating > > everything in their validation process. They are our last and best > hope > > for maintaining the integrity of DXCC (notwithstanding remote country > > cheating, which is another topic). > > > 73, Bill W4ZV > > > P.S I know of at least 6 folks who have been disqualified for 160 > cheating, > > so yes, ARRL does care about this. > _________________ > Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband > Reflector _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector _________________ Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
