Per your paragraph, "Another logical next step would be to enable a
QSL-printing facility ... others requested a printable QSL from that
station." There is a company which does that, they are Globalqsl, see
http://www.globalqsl.com/ for more details.
73 ES CUL
Mr. John R. Klim II
QSL LOTW-Bureau- direct
As a courtesy, I upload to eQSL but if you use that - also pls upload to
LOTW or hard card.
ARRL LM-0008416263, AMSAT LM-2187, QRPARCI #10392, FISTS # 5015, MQFD
10-X Life Member # 68135, Springbok Chapter # 1874, Chesapeake Bay
Chapter # 549
[mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org] On Behalf Of Pete Smith
Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 12:26 PM
To: Don Field; CQ-Contest MailList
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Pre-emptive QSLing - was:Contesters and LOTW
Well, what I, at least, would like is to see LOTW evolve into a
free-standing, international entity which would service ARRL, CQ, RGSB,
DARC, etc., so as to support maybe 90 percent of the world demand for
awards. I think the ARRL solution so far isn't bad, but I'd like to see it
de-nationalized as a route to broader international acceptance. Wouldn't
it be great if LOTW (or its evolved offspring) could be interfaced to the
log-checking databases of the major international contests, such that a
verified contest QSO would automatically be entered in the database for use
toward any awards.
Another logical next step would be to enable a QSL-printing facility like
that on EQsl, such that stations wishing to do so could download a
printable QSL card for any QSOs they particularly wanted to put up on the
wall. Carry it a step further, and any station could, for a small fee,
upload a customized QSL that would be used when others requested a
printable QSL from that station.
Paper mail is slowly going away - why shouldn't QSLing go all-electronic?
73, Pete N4ZR
At 11:20 AM 8/9/2007, Don Field wrote:
>The question Pete is surely "universally accepted" for what?
>Why do people want QSL cards?
>1. To decorate the shack wall and show to friends and family.
>2. To apply for one of the thousands of awards that exist (see K1BV web
>for an idea of how many there are)
>3. Specifically to apply for DXCC or WAS (only awards currently supported
>I would suggest, outside the US at least, that (3) is in the minority! So
>"universal acceptance" of LoTW, whatever that means, is a loooong way off.
>On 09/08/07, Pete Smith <email@example.com> wrote:
> > What I've done for about 7 years is to pre-emptively QSL from my own
> > using a sorting routine that only generates QSLs for the first QSO with
> > station on a given band/mode combination. Then when QSLs come in from
> > bureau I just cull through them for the ones I need, and figure that I
> > have
> > already covered the rest. DX4WIN does the sorting of outgoing QSLs,
> > described above, very easily. Both cost and time (in particular) are
> > better than going through each card, and I find that year by year I am
> > producing QSLs for a smaller percentage of total QSOs made. I still QSL
> > direct for all cards received directly, though not always right away.
> > That being said, I would love to see LOTW become universally accepted -
> > have 96,000 QSOs on it now, so a lot of people could get my QSL for DXCC
> > or
> > WAS a lot more easily than paper QSLing. But back when LOTW started, I
> > asked the question whether I should rely exclusively on LOTW, and the
> > consensus was that it was way too soon to stop paper QSLing.
> > 73, Pete N4ZR
>CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest mailing list