[Moon-Net] EME QSL Etiquette question

Edward R Cole kl7uw at acsalaska.net
Tue Nov 22 22:18:39 CET 2016


The salient point both of you seem to miss is 
card authenticity is the concern for qualifying 
for awards.  ARRL controls who gets WAS or 
DXCC.  Its their card reader officials who 
determine this.  ARRL categorically rejects all electronic QSL's except LOTW.

I'm not sure I will ever pursue either award but 
I do enjoy collecting real cards.  I would be 
fine with jpeg attachments if I never seek DXCC 
or WAS.  But if I do, later on, its good to have "legal"  QSL's.

LOTW seems way too fraught with complexity 
getting registered.  Much easier to register to 
vote or obtain a driver license in the USA.

my two cents!

73, Ed - KL7UW

At 11:57 AM 11/22/2016, Simon Lewis wrote:
>Content-Language: en-NZ
>Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
> 
>boundary="_000_HE1PR05MB125700D54529FC5F807B515D8FB40HE1PR05MB1257eurp_"
>
>This one comes up occasionally on DX forums too.
>
>I guess the question is what you want to do with QSL’s?
>
>If your just collecting cards personally and on 
>EME then I can pretty much know the callsigns I 
>work and I know if a card is genuine.
>
>On HF I’d get all sorts of QSL cards in and 
>occasionally the QSO data would be invalid – that card would end up in the bin.
>
>There have been occasions where cards have been 
>faked for awards but I’d say that invariably 
>come to light as has been the case recently 
>where a high profile DX’rs QSO’s were false and 
>that person suffered the consequences quite publically!
>
>In effect if your not worried about the physical 
>card then Log Book of the World from ARRL offers 
>one option for electronic confirmation exchange. 
>Its quite easy to set up and is protected by digital signatures.
>
>Actually my logs are uploaded automatically to LOTW inc my EME QSO’s.
>
>Beauty of this is no post, no SAE .. no $ - but 
>no physical card. And I don’t need to send my 
>cards to a checker – which in NZ is limted to a 
>few validated ARRL card checkers.
>
>There are a number of other electronic QSL 
>systems like EQSL and some orgs also accept 
>QSO’s from their system subject to some rules.
>
>So I guess the question is simple – chasing 
>awards then it needs more rigour – but you can 
>always find people who will cheat but I think they only cheat themselves.
>
>LOTW is a good option – more people signing up 
>all the time and growing popularity.
>
>Paper is still ok – and nothing wrong with doing 
>an EQSL – the other person can print it off if 
>they like – but just be wary if you suddenly in 
>the future start chasing awards – they are 
>liable not to be accepted by some orgs.
>
>Cheers
>
>Simon ZL4PLM
>
>
>
>Sent from <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986>Mail for Windows 10
>
>From: <mailto:ka1gt at hotmail.com>Bob Atkins
>Sent: Wednesday, 23 November 2016 9:44 AM
>To: <mailto:moon-net at mailman.pe1itr.com>moon-net at mailman.pe1itr.com
>Subject: Re: [Moon-Net] EME QSL Etiquette question
>
>
>David
>
>
>When you say "No point in sending email JPGs for 
>QSL cards, not valid for any award, as could be 
>forged so easily" I sort of see the logic, but 
>QSL cards aren't watermarked, don't use special 
>paper and don't have serial numbers or special 
>printing like banknotes. So what distinguishes 
>between a "genuine" card vs a "forgery"? If it's 
>the hand written content on the card,  it would 
>be fairly easy to copy a card digitally (erasing 
>any hand written content using an image editor), 
>then print it out and fill in the contact 
>details by hand. Forging a QSL card would be a 
>trivial thing to do. I'm reasonably experienced 
>at digital image editing, but I think I could 
>"fake" any QSL card in a few minutes If I had a sample to copy.
>
>
>I don't send a lot of cards, so I print each one 
>from a JPEG file myself. I do enter the text by 
>hand and sign it, but it would be just as easy 
>to enter script text digitally and use a digital 
>copy of my signature.  Lots of organizations 
>accept copies of signatures. For example you can 
>FAX signed legal documents and the signatures 
>are valid. Through cryptography and public and 
>private keys, any digital file can be 
>authenticated with near absolute certainty and 
>it would be possible to print a digital signature key
>
>
>The logic of not regarding a printed, emailed, 
>QSL card as "genuine" seems pretty flawed given 
>current technology but I guess some people and 
>some organizations get pretty worked up about 
>awards. Personally I don't care about awards. If 
>I know a card is a valid card, I don't care how 
>I get it. But rules are rules I guess. If an 
>organization requires "genuine" QSL cards and 
>(assuming that can tell what a "genuine" cards 
>is) you need to give them what they require.
>
>
>For a hobby using such advanced technology 
>(especially for digital EME), it seems a little 
>ironic that the only accepted for of proof of a 
>contact is a piece of paper physically sent through the main!
>
>
>Looks like the best way to deal with QSL cards 
>is to send a QSL with a SASE and not to expect 
>100% return. I return a card to anyone who sends 
>me one, but I'm in the fortunate position that 
>it's not a financial burden to me (and I don't 
>make that many contacts anyway!).
>
>
>Thanks for the update on QSLing
>
>
>73
>
>Bob
>
>KA1GT
>
>
>
>
>
>
>----------
>From: David Anderson <david at gm4jjj.co.uk>
>Sent: Tuesday, November 22, 2016 7:36 AM
>To: Bob Atkins; moon-net at mailman.pe1itr.com
>Subject: Re: [Moon-Net] EME QSL Etiquette question
>
>Bob,
>
>
>A few points.
>
>IRC are useless now, post offices don't issue 
>new ones and are reluctant to honour them, they 
>see so few they don't know what they are. Often 
>people send ones that are out of date and they 
>are really worthless. Green stamps don't expire.
>
>Some stations offer the ability to pay via 
>PayPal via OQRS where you can request a card 
>direct without sending one. You have the choice 
>of asking for a free card but it will be sent via the Buro and won't be quick.
>
>No point in sending email JPGs for QSL cards, 
>not valid for any award, as could be forged so easily.
>
>You are right, due to the number of contacts 
>now, it can be a real burden in time and money 
>to QSL for many DX stations. Postage rates are 
>much higher than they used to be.
>
>So QSL only if you are asked to by the other 
>station, or if you need a card for an award or new DXCC State locator etc.
>
>Always check <http://QRZ.COM>QRZ.COM for QSL 
>details of the DX station first, don't assume 
>they use the Buro, eQSL, LOTW or anything.
><http://qrz.com/>Callsign Database by QRZ.COM
>qrz.com
>Includes news, searchable callsign database, 
>license renewals and updates, DX spotting 
>reports, APRS resources, clubs, solar report, and links.
>
>
>
>Consider joining LOTW, you don't need to be an ARRL member.
>
>For regular non EME contacts I ask for return 
>postage in US $ or Euro and a SASE for direct 
>cards. Or the card goes via the Buro, but it 
>won't be quick. I accept OQRS payment for direct 
>card requests without a card being received.
>
>For EME only I am happy to QSL direct without 
>charge at present, I may review this if I become 
>very active. I don't send cards out unless 
>requested, or I especially need a QSL for some 
>reason. I use LOTW and eQSL, but actually wonder 
>why I use eQSL as it isn't valid for awards, but LOTW is.
>
>Once again, the most important thing is to find 
>out how the other fellow handles QSLing, and the 
>place is <http://QRZ.COM>QRZ.COM.
><http://qrz.com/>Callsign Database by QRZ.COM
>qrz.com
>Includes news, searchable callsign database, 
>license renewals and updates, DX spotting 
>reports, APRS resources, clubs, solar report, and links.
>
>
>
>73
>
>David Anderson GM4JJJ
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>On Tue, 22 Nov 2016 at 07:49, Bob Atkins 
><<mailto:ka1gt at hotmail.com>ka1gt at hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>It's been about 35 years since I was last active 
>on 432 EME. At that time there weren't a huge 
>number of stations on and it was all CW. QSOs 
>could take 30 minutes or more to complete, 
>Consequently sending and receiving QSL cards 
>directly wasn't much of an issue since not many were involved.
>
>
>What's the EME QSL etiquette today? Do people 
>generally QSL direct? It was always good 
>practice to include a SASE with a card, 
>including postage if the contact was with a US 
>station, or IRCs if international. However I 
>don't think you can buy IRCs from the US post office any more.
>
>
>I'm perfectly happy paying posting on any cards 
>I send when I get a card from another station, 
>but I guess that the cost of postage and number 
>of contacts possible today might be a financial burden on some stations.
>
>
>Is anyone using an electronic (email) QSL card 
>system, sending a printable JPEG file with all 
>the contact details filled in and signed by the 
>station operator? I print my own cards anyway, 
>so another station would get the same card 
>whether I print it or they print it, though mine 
>would have hand written text and a live signature.
>
>
>I'd like to exchange cards with a few EME 
>contacts made during the contest (and at other 
>times). Just wondering what's the general 
>practice (if such a ting exists) on EME these days.
>
>
>Bob
>
>KA1GT
>_______________________________________________
>Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions 
>are at 
><http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html>http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html
>
>_______________________________________________
>Moon-Net posting and subscription instructions 
>are at http://www.nlsa.com/nets/moon-net-help.html

73, Ed - KL7UW
http://www.kl7uw.com
     "Kits made by KL7UW"
Dubus Mag Business e-mail:
     dubususa at gmail.com 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.pe1itr.com/pipermail/moon-net/attachments/20161122/10c81e39/attachment-0001.html 


More information about the Moon-net mailing list