[Cwo] log check question: hard-ass or not?

[Alan Maenchen]

I'm trying .. the problem is how to do that?
It's not easy.

Alan





On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 2:23 PM, John Miller <webaron at gmail.com> wrote:

> Be a bit lenient.
>
> For this first CWO suggest using a "Log Checking Lite" filter.
>
> Give the benefit of the doubt where possible.
>
> 73,
> John, K6MM
>
>
>
> On Sep 23, 2011, at 12:33 PM, Alan Maenchen wrote:
>
> I'm closing in on starting log checking/scoring. Maybe another day of
> playing with software as opposed to doing what I'm paid to do here at work.
> ;-)
>
> I ran across this issue:  K6GT was logged by 18 guys as "GEORGE" instead of
> "GEO" (copied by 220 guys, and that's what the K6GT logs say).
> The log check pops this out as a "Bad Name" and dings the log score.
>
> What are your feelings about this?
>
> The easiest machine check is to do a simple match of "sent" name and
> "received" name in the two logs... which is what I'm doing. If they match,
> it's good. If not, it doesn't count. I could do some aliases like "AL"
> instead of "ALAN" and others, but that's considerably more work.
>
> BTW,  I've already built in a small bias in checking serial numbers.
> Numbers can be +/-1 from what was reported to be sent.  I've found that to
> be wise in CQP where I've been able to prove that the actual sent NR can be
> one off from the logged NR under some circumstances.
>
>
> 73, Alan  AD6E
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
> Cwo mailing list
> Cwo at kkn.net
> http://www.kkn.net/mailman/listinfo/cwo
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.kkn.net/pipermail/cwo/attachments/20110923/ca2d89a2/attachment.html