Yes, you still need to upload the CSV file twice if you use uploading.
When I added the S2S facility, most of the code needed to handle S2S logging was already written for entering and dealing with chases. Being a confirmed lazy dude, rather than write lots of new code I wrote a little bit of code and used as much existing chaser code as possible. For entering it manually it was an extension to the current chase entering screen.
For uploading I asked for some suggestions for the new format of CSV file and, as usual, I got some brilliant suggestions from the SOTAristas. If you look back in the archives you can find who suggested them. The result was the V2 file which lets one format of file hold activation, chase and S2S data at the same time. This was a significant improvement of the old way. The only downside was the original structure of how the uploading worked was such that because what is logged and how it is written to the database tables is so very different between chasing and activating, trying to get a one pass upload was simply too complex.
I could have rewritten a lot of code and made some fundamental changes to make a single pass upload work. But in the end, the major differences between the old and new code was the CSV parsing code. (A parser for non-programmers, reads a formatted piece of text and is smart enough to extract the data needed and cope with variations in format etc.) I extracted the parsing code and error checking from the original routines and then wrote a new parser. When you upload a file you say if itâs activation data or chase/s2s data and one of two routines is selected, those routines check the file and feed it to the new or old parser and that parsed data gets fed back to the original routines. So we got S2S uploads and combined chase and activation data for the minimum of work.
Fewer changes means fewer places for me to screw up (which I did lots of times). But you still need to upload a file twice. That rankles me a little still. But we got something better for less effort and sooner.
The asterix is meaningless in my checking, I never use it
Every Award claim is checked against the individualâs database records
If there is an apparent inconsistency then I spend the time cross checking logs (which can take forever!)
The main problem is initially caused by Activators changing their logs to put in a callsign that they did not use on-air for that contact. Stopping that practice would kill this problem at source.
I heard an activation where the activator used a club call except on 5MHz where he used his own call. He would have been wrong entering it with either of the calls used. A bit more code required perhaps Andy?
Yes that is a known issue and is the only issue. There is no effortless fix. You end up having the wrong log in the call for 5MHz and the right log for other bands and you simply add a âCall used XX1XXâ in the comments for the 5MHz QSOs. Or you log the other way round and add âCall used YY1YYâ for the other band comments.
Nah. Whenever Iâve been using a club callsign to promote things on an activation, I have refrained from operating in a way that was outwith the rules, and kept the entire activation under that club callsign.
When Iâve been within a period of having use of a club callsign, but wanted to do 5MHz or some VHF contesting as part of an activation, I have refrained from using the club call, and done the entire activation under my own call.
I reckon you probably meant explode rather than asplode. So are you going to go back and change that word, please add a comment documenting why it was changed and referencing OED or other trusted system. Or will I just change my copy of the reflector?
Donât take a tool away from all of us simply because a few folks are doing bad things with the asterisks. For many of us, the asterisks are valuable and irreplaceable.
For example, I make frequent use of missing asterisks to identify and correct simple submission mistakes. If Iâve fat-fingered entries in my chaser log (such as frequency, date, mode, etc.), it is fairly easy to resubmit that line with correct info, then delete the original submission.
The asterisk is also missing if an activator has my call sign logged incorrectly. Such is life. Once I know the reason, I simply re-submit that log entry with an added note i.e. âhe logged me as K9ZMBâ, or âlogged as K7ZMDâ. Then I delete the original submission.
Then there may be times (only one comes to mind) when I erroneously believe an activator replied to my call. Investigating the missing asterisk will reveal no trace of my call sign in the activator log. Thatâs not a valid contact, and deleting it from my chaser log solves the problem. Listening more closely helps to avoid more of the same.
Missing asterisks also help me identify activators who never bother to submit an activator log. These ops go on my âignoreâ list (because I wonder if they also never bother to hike up a hill).
So do I.[quote=âK9ZMD, post:33, topic:14166â]
Missing asterisks also help me identify activators who never bother to submit an activator log. These ops go on my âignoreâ list (because I wonder if they also never bother to hike up a hill).
[/quote]
Gary, most of what your write is how itâs meant to be. Use the system to find typos, fix them or add a note for your benefit saying activator log is wrong etc. Sure, we all have been definite we were working someone, logged it only weâre not in their log. Youâre never sure if they logged it wrong or you were mistaken. Delete the QSO or mark the comment with ânot in his log but Iâm sure we had a QSOâ? I donât know but probably Iâd go with deleting the QSO.
The one which I donât agree with is not logging it because the activator doesnât log / always log his activations. Your logs are of value not just to you, not just for awards checking, but as general records of activity and for further analysis. As we get more and more data, we get to the point were we have a record of (generally QRP ) activity over large parts of Europe, N. America and now Australia and Asia. We can use that data to analyse and demonstrate what people were achieving with relatively simple activator set ups. Sure may chasers have fabulous stations, but more have average Joe Q. Ham stations. The more logged data, the more accurate our analyses will be.
So whilst you may not see the value in logging those chases when the activator doesnât log, there is intrinsic value in them. Log them when you get the chance.
I agree with Andrew, education is the answer. Taking away the confirmation asterisk is just another example of taking the easy way out. Because a few misuse something, take it away from everyone. That would mean there is no benefit to doing things right, you will still get it taken away because of someone else. Personally I donât think taking something away from the many to stop the few has any merit. Besides you can still do it, you just have to check all your entries.
When pass reasonable time, I make use the missing asterisks to identify and correct mistakes (chaser). I usually wrong when update much contacts at the same time (incorrect band, or format date, (english, spanish))⌠also utc/local time.
In my chaser log it is easy check if an activator has my call sign logged incorrectly or if this activator never submit your logâŚIn this case i delete this contact.
This summer, i have checked my log (year by year) and i deleted all contacts erroneous.
I wasnât aware that the database can be put to such valuable use, so I appreciate the info youâve provided. I think that my logging practice will not cause any problems, as my chaser submissions actually include every single contact I make with any SOTA activator . . . even dupes due to contact on multiple bands, or contacts with multiple ops on the same summit.
In contrast, I simply will not chase any op on my âIgnore Listâ. No wasted time, no contact, nothing to log, therefore nothing to submit to the SOTA database. That list, by the way, is very short: only those ops who I know, or suspect, are not making valid activations.
Here are the sort who make the list. Anyone who (Iâve learned through social media) will drive an ATV directly to a summit, operate from a vehicle, or consider it âclose enoughâ if they operate somewhere within the same county as a summit. In addition, as I mentioned earlier, my list also includes those ops who apparently enjoy being chased, but are too lazy to ever submit an activation log. To me, that is sufficient reason to conclude that theyâre also too lazy to hike up a hill.
Hi Isidro,
It is of course your choice, and as a SOTA RM I think you are being very correct. In my opinion however when an Activator choses not to (or forgets to) sumit his/her log, chasers should not lose the points. How long do you wait before checking - some activators can take weeks to submit their logs (for example someone on holidy will probably leave log submission until they return home).
As regards the asterisk question, I learnt early on that this has no âofficialâ value and is not used to check when one has reached an award level (rather random cross checks are performed between logs). I used to go through and check I had an asterisk against every contact but having seen issues where, as you say, activators simply donât submit their logs (or do it incorrectly in some way), I rely on my paper log to say what I worked and enter that in good faith.
So if the asterisk went away, it wouldnât worry me and I can see how it being their is causing invalid changes to be made to otherwise correct chasers logs as described by Andy and other MT members.
I delete contacts whithout arterisc on 2013/2014.
I wait a year or so.
For my sota is not a competition but I like that my contacts are real between hunter and activator. (Such as lotw, eqsl, qrz, etc âŚ)
For example, an activator I hear EA5AR, (This callsign does not participate in sota) and I eliminated the contact.
I could have sent an e-mail requesting to edit it, but I did not see any need to bother for this reason.
What Andy says does not happen to me.That of having to change the callsign completely to match.
