CQ-Contest
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] R: QRP - Get Over It

To: <ik2dzn@astorri.it>, <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] R: QRP - Get Over It
From: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>
Reply-to: wc1m@msn.com
Date: Wed, 4 Jan 2006 14:21:22 -0500
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
 
> One thing I also do not agree with you is the QSL thing.
> 
> The QSL reply is a COURTESY matter; if they do not send the 
> stamp reply via bureau but REPLY!

Yes, a reply via bureau should be done when possible, but I believe Tom was
referring to U.S. ops who send plain-old postcards with no return postage to
other U.S. ops. We do not have a domestic bureau here in the U.S., so a
reply costs money. The senders don't realize that contest stations get
hundreds or even thousands of QSL cards we don't need for a "new one" and
return postage can really add up. People talk about the courtesy of a reply,
but return postage is a courtesy that should be observed as well!

As it turns out, I've never received a direct QSL request from a DX station
without return postage. If I did, I would reply via the bureau -- because I
can. But when a U.S. station omits postage, I do not reply unless the card
is a new state/county/band/mode for me. I think it's fair for me to cough up
return postage if I need the card. Of course, the other op has no way of
knowing what I need, and should therefore include return postage.

73, Dick WC1M
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>