Re: Membership Requirements


Stephen Melachrinos
 

Jim -

I'm really not positive--I wasn't around when the club actually started, and didn't become active in management until a few years later. But my suspicion is that the founding members (Jay, Jay, Jay and Tom) wanted to make sure that logs weren't completely faked. Back when we started, LoTW didn't exist yet--the only online QSL system (that I recall) was eQSL. I'm not positive, but I probably scanned either a QSL card or an eQSL and emailed that in. 

I think we made a significant improvement in implementing this when the membership checker "accepted" a QSO record from someone else who had uploaded a log. 

Going forward, I don't know. I'm a traditionalist--I don't generally like changes for the sake of change. I don't think that asking an applicant to show proof of one of the QSOs is a great hardship. With all the online QSL systems that now exist (eQSL, LoTW, QRZ, HRD, etc) and the endorsement checker option available, I'd be tempted to leave things as-is.

Steve

-----Original Message-----
From: Jim K5SP <jinnis@...>
To: 070Club <070Club@groups.io>
Sent: Mon, Dec 30, 2019 4:38 pm
Subject: Re: [070Club] Membership Requirements

Steve, one of the membership requirements that I have always wondered about is the need to either match a qso in the log submitted, or, submit a qsl card as proof.
Everything else in 070 is based up honesty and integrity of the members, in contests and for endorsements, there is no validation of the contacts.  So why was the proof required for membership when the organization founded?
Should we consider dropping the contact confirmation, and just accept a log showing they have whatever number of unique PSK-31 contacts we require?
Jim K5SP
On 12/30/2019 5:27 AM, Stephen Melachrinos via Groups.Io wrote:
Dan -

Yes, that's the way they deal with callsign "management." I suspect it's an artifact of their fully-automated system--they may not have the code written to implement and validate callsign changes, or the ability to process log files created under different callsigns during distinct callsign effectivity periods.

I don't know what happens if someone then is assigned a call that was previously registered (by the former holder) as an EPC member. Does the system recognize that someone new has the call? Or does the new holder "inherit" the QSOs of the first holder.

We're getting off-topic now, and should probably drop this discussion of EPC as irrelevant to the 070 club. I think the point has been made that EPC and 070 have different membership models, both driven by and driving their respective club implementations.

Steve
W3HF


-----Original Message-----
From: Dan Morris - KZ3T <dbmorris315@...>
To: 070Club <070Club@groups.io>
Sent: Sun, Dec 29, 2019 9:08 pm
Subject: Re: [070Club] Membership Requirements

Interesting comment about the EPC club. I also joined them but it wasn’t long before I just stopped even giving out my number.  This is interesting in how they do their numbers. Not sure how many people realize this and one so an see that their numbers are way up there but those member numbers are very deceiving.  EveryOne know how hams change their call signs on a whim.  Well, if you have an EPC number and you change your call sign, then you have to or are supposed to get a NEW NUMBER! That really is absurd. . . So the number follows the call and if the call goes away, so does the number.

Dan Morris KZ3T #070 1965



--
Jim,  K5SP #483
Member Services Director

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