Re: arrl is accepting eqsls for dxcc credit


Dick Thompson <wb0dul@...>
 

Hi Bill,
 
Well, I'm not on a crusade here.  I just want a clarification of what Bill Moore really said or what he meant when he said it.  A simple "If cards are printed by a printer and sent to you through eQSL and eQSL has verified your logbook, qualifies as a legitimate contact" should be enough.  I'm a supporter af the ARRL.  They have done a lot for amateur radio over the years.  But they should also take into consideration the cost of sending and (hopefully) receiving a QSL card for confirmation of a country. 
 
I think we should all write to Bill Moore.  His address is dxcc@....  We should push for a clarification from the League.  Bill simply manages the program, the League makes the decisions.  He says that he was quoted "out of context."  Well, I read his e-mail on eQSL and I don't quite understand his statement. 
 
Write to him.  Maybe a little pressure from everyone will help get a decision from the League.  It may not be the decision we want to hear, but at least we would know where they stand. 
 
73,
 
Dick
070 Member # 180
 

----- Original Message -----
To: 070@...
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2002 1:14 AM
Subject: Re: [070] arrl is accepting eqsls for dxcc credit

Dick,

Sure appreciate your efforts (and those of others as
well) at getting this issue resolved.  Keep up the pressure!

I'm kinda new at this, but lately, with the 14 to 29 Mhz
bands as open as they are, I get the idea that working
100 DXCC entities is nowhere near as challenging as
getting 100 paper QSL returns.  Maybey that isn't the
case when the sunspots dry up and blow away, but I
thought this DXCC challenge thingie was supposed to be
about radios, antennas, propogation, sleepless nights,
sensitive receivers and expeditions; not the intricacies
of the international postal systems.  The way it is, the
emphasis is on the wrong skill......... or am I missing
something here?? Maybe we need to run half watt QRP just
to even up the challenge.............or enter the 21st
century like the rest of the world.

73,  Bill
KG6EXF
> I agree with what you say, 100%, Steve.  I was a little puzzled by Bill Moore's
> reply, and was wondering to myself whether his statement that the League's
> Position hasn't changed on DXCC or whether he's saying that the Leagues position
> hasn't changed as long as they have a printed QSL card.  He was not very clear,
> and I think I am going to write to him again and ask why he feels he was quoted
> out of context.  Maybe we should all write to him and ask what gives.  It would
> be interesting if the ARRL would put out a formal statement on how they stand. 
> In short I think they are concerned that their own Logbook of the World would be
> jeopardized.  I really doubt that is the case. 
>
> It's getting very expensive to QSL these days.  That applies from our end and
> the DX stations end.  I have never been able to understand how a QSL sent
> electronically could be construed as unacceptable.  What does a "printed" QSL
> have that makes it superior? 
>
> Maybe I'm missing something here, maybe not. 
>
> Thanks for responding, Steve.  I appreciate your comments. 
>
> 73,
>
> Dick
> wb0dul@...
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>   ----- Original Message -----
>   From: Melachrinos, Stephen J
>   To: '070@...'
>   Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 6:29 PM
>   Subject: RE: [070] arrl is accepting eqsls for dxcc credit
>
>
>   Dick -
>
>   I guess I'm not sure what Bill means by "quoted out of context." Both the
> email posting on the TARA group and the page on the eQSL web site APPEAR to be
> complete copies of Bill's email. Ernest's announcement is admittedly
> abbreviated, but I believe it has the same information regarding the card
> itself. (It must be a printed card, created by eQSL, not the recipient, and sent
> to the recipient as a printed card, such as by mail.)
>
>   The only thing missing is the statement regarding "checking the log to verify
> the contact." Here's where maybe it gets a little sticky. I believe Bill's > intent here is that the "QSL Manager" (in this case eQSL) compares the QSO
> information submitted by me to the logs of the DX station, and only creates a
> QSL when that information matches. That is the typical routine for a manager.
> But there are some cases where QSL managers simply QSL all contacts whether
> requested or not. In this case, there is no "log comparison," as the manager
> simply QSLs based on his own information. The latter is what eQSL does. If a DX
> station sends me an eQSL, I can print and receive that card without formally
> confirming it. And there is no indication of that on the eQSL card.
>
>   The spin that the eQSL folks are putting on it, based on Bill's email, is that
> in order for the card to be valid for DXCC, **I** must compare the card to
> **my** log and verify the contact. Typically I will then send a confirming reply
> via the eQSL system. And once I make this comparison, and then have eQSL print
> and mail a card, the card will be valid for DXCC.
>
>   Each person should read Bill's email in its entirety, and compare it to the
> process described by eQSL, and form their own opinion on whether Bill is being
> misinterpreted.
>
>   Unfortunately this thing is still spinning out of hand. Bill's email's appear
> to be inconsistent, when I don't believe he intends them to be that way. At this
> point, I believe two things need to happen:
>
>   1. There needs to be some sort of formal announcement from the ARRL regarding
> this.
>   2. The ARRL needs to agree that the steps laid out on the eQSL site are
> correct, and that cards created that way will be accepted.
>
>   So far I think Bill has stated a process, and eQSL has interpreted it.
> (Correctly, in my opinion.) But Bill is not the final authority on DXCC, and
> until they speak formally, this issue is not settled. I hope they are working on
> this.
>
>   Steve
>   W3HF
>
>
>     -----Original Message-----
>     From: Dick Thompson [mailto:wb0dul@...]
>     Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 3:50 PM
>     To: 070@...
>     Subject: Re: [070] arrl is accepting eqsls for dxcc credit
>
>
>     Ernest, I dropped an e-mail to Bill Moore to ask for a carification on the
> DXCC acceptance of eQSL cards. 
>
>     Here is his response to me.  I wish it was more positive. 
>
>     Response from Bill Moore at ARRL: 
>
>     Hi Dick:
>     
>     I was quoted out of context. If you read my message closely you'll see.
>     
>     However, DXCC has not changed its position with regards to e-QSLs.
>     
>     73
>     
>     Bill Moore NC1L
>     
>     
>
>     -----Original Message-----
>     From: Dick - WB0DUL
>     Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 4:02 PM
>     To: dxcc@...
>     Subject: Fw: [070] arrl is accepting eqsls for dxcc credit
>
>
>     Hi Bill,
>     
>     I received the following e-mail from the 070 site on Yahoo Groups.  Is there
> any truth to it?  I haven't seen anything on http://www.arrl.org/
>     Until I do, I'm not buying the announcement.  Many are waiting for word that > it is true.  It would make sense if it was.  If it is, then an announcement
> would be nice.  The alleged e-mail from you is posted on the eQSL site (see link
> in message below). 
>     
>     Hope to hear back from you. 
>     
>     73,
>     
>     Dick
>     wb0dul@...
>       ----- Original Message -----
>       From: kg9ni
>       To: 070@...
>       Sent: Saturday, February 09, 2002 12:29 PM
>       Subject: [070] arrl is accepting eqsls for dxcc credit
>
>
>       Hello all.  ARRL is accepting eQSLs that are printed and mailed via
>       the eQSL mailing service for DXCC credit...this is big news.  The eQSL
>       cost is still a buck a card--less than direct DX postage in most cases
>       (I think) & a lot faster.  Currently eQSL can only mail out to US
>       addresses, but I expect that we might(???) see eQSL mailing points
>       cropping up in DX locations to provide the same service there w/o DX
>       postage costs.  That would be pretty cool...
>
>       News at:
>       http://www.eqsl.cc  (login and read the news...February 8, 2002 email
>       from Bill Moore, NC1L, is there in its entirety)
>
>       Thanks to Bob, VX4XA (VE4XA) for letting me know!
>
>       73-
>       Ernest
>       KG9NI
>
>
>
>
>        Check out the 070 Club website at
>     < http://hometown.aol.com/n3dqu/podxs070.htm > for
>     the latest information on 070 Club activities.
>       To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>     070-unsubscribe@... or N3DQU@....
>
>
>
>     Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>
>         Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
>               ADVERTISEMENT
>             
>       
>       
>
>      Check out the 070 Club website at
>   < http://hometown.aol.com/n3dqu/podxs070.htm > for
>   the latest information on 070 Club activities.
>     To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>   070-unsubscribe@... or N3DQU@....
>
>
>
>   Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
>
>


   Check out the 070 Club website at
< http://hometown.aol.com/n3dqu/podxs070.htm > for
the latest information on 070 Club activities.
  To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
070-unsubscribe@... or N3DQU@....



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.

Join main@070Club.groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.