I knew when I saw my Challenge * that no certificate was available as I checked on it. I decided I didn’t need the plaque. It seems to me certificates should be available for all ARRL awards, as well as plaques for those that want them. ARRL should also be willing to send out emailed certificates to those that prefer that option.

The key is technology-ARRL having the appropriate technology (within reason) that is user-friendly to satisfy its membership. LOTW is wonderful, but when I tried to get a /150 LOTW certificate several years ago I had a lot of trouble doing that, even with ARRL help. The punchline: I only made two N7JB/150 QSOs!

73, Jim N7JB*

+ AA6YQ comments below

The key is technology-ARRL having the appropriate technology (within reason) that is user-friendly to satisfy its membership.

+ The ARRL's track record in software development is beyond miserable:

1. LoTW was severely under-scoped and under-staffed. Initial availability in October 2003 was more than a year later than scheduled; functional testing, performance testing, stress testing, and user documentation were all jettisoned to achieve this date. Instead of addressing these deferred tasks, the sole LoTW developer was instead directed to add functionality, e.g. support for the WPX and Triple Play awards - which attracted more LoTW users. In November 2012, LoTW began losing submitted QSOs, prompting users to pre-emptively resubmit QSOs, resulting in the online software equivalent of thermal runaway; LoTW's processing ground to a halt. QSOs were being lost due to a latent defect triggered by increased usage - a defect that a competent stress test would have revealed. In 2013, a recovery roadmap developed by an architecture review team convinced the Board of Directors to hire two developers for LoTW, and to acquire additional hardware so that defect repairs and improvements to LoTW could be tested without first releasing them to the system supporting LoTW users. The new developers were tasked with improving the reliability, scalability, and performance of the LoTW Server, deferring increases in functionality and improvements to usability in order to ensure focus - a policy that management then violated by directing the LoTW team to support the NPOTA, Centennial, and Grid Chase activities. In July 2017, the updated LoTW Server was finally released to public us. After LoTW was extended to support the CQ WAZ award in early 2018, all LoTW developers were re-assigned to the "DXCC system replacement" project. With the exception of improvements to TQSL, an open source project led by Rick K1MU, there have been no improvements to LoTW's functionality or usability during the past 3 years. The recent announcement of a multi-year cloud-hosted "LoTW 2.0" project by the ARRL CEO is preventing further usability improvements to TQSL because they might be inconsistent with "LoTW 2.0", -- which is not defined, funded, or staffed. Attempting to maintain an existing system in public use while in parallel conducting a multiyear development effort to replace it is a classic failure pattern.

2. The ARRL's DXCC system, which is independent of LoTW, is archaic and fragile. An attempt to outsource its replacement failed. The re-assignment of LoTW developers to this project in 2018 successfully stopped progress in LoTW, but has so far failed to produce a replacement DXCC system.

3. The ARRL's "Lifelong Learning" project announced 2 years ago has so far failed to deliver beyond what's described here: http://www.arrl.org/learning-center

4. The ARRL's "Association Management" software project announced 2 years ago has yet to be deployed.

5. The ARRL has no effective presence in social media, despite the existence of multiple online groups with more than 10K members.

+ A culture whose motto is "we're unlikely to change" combined with a demonstrated inability to develop, deploy, and utilize online software is not a good combination.

+ Don't like it? Engage with your ARRL Director.

de AA6YQ

Nice ass (terick) !!