Revised QSO Rates..

ki3v at ki3v at
Sat Nov 11 05:02:35 EST 1995

Thanks to all who directed me to the location of the QRATE files....

Here are my revised rates....

SS 1994 Phone   Hr of 2204  191 Q/hr
SS 1992 Phone   Hr of 2202  187 Q/hr
SS 1995 CW       Hr of 2203  104 Q/Hr

See Ya!    Rich  KI3V/7

Richard Hallman               ki3v at
11870 Heartpine St           
Reno Nv  89506               ki3v at w7ta.#nonev.nv

>From beaton at (Alastair Beaton)  Sun Nov 12 00:12:24 1995
From: beaton at (Alastair Beaton) (Alastair Beaton)
Date: Sun, 12 Nov 1995 00:12:24 GMT
Subject: QSLs Deter Contest Operation
Message-ID: <199511120012.AAA10987 at>

As a contest "minnow" it amazes me the bucket loads of QSLs I get even after
a brief contest appearance. Most are these automatically-generated
sticky-label types, and I'm sorry, but life's too short to sit down and
write out cards or laser labels for these. 

I get a card which says PSE QSL FOR (some) AWARD then I do quite happily.
And I always QSL direct if I get an IRC or a buck. 

Perhaps a lot of QSL refusal problems would go away if people stopped
generating billions and billions of spurious QSLs just to celebrate that
they are on the air. Only send a QSL if you REALLY need a reply. Who knows,
maybe ARRL and RSGB sub fees would fall if they didn't have to spend so much
on postage...


P.S. Can anyone confirm or deny an old rumour here. In the former U.S.S.R.
did QSLs count towards license upgrades, electronic spares or points towards
a new Lada or Yugo? We always presumed they must, on account of how many we

>From Bill Turner <wrt at>  Sun Nov 12 01:49:07 1995
From: Bill Turner <wrt at> (Bill Turner)
Date: Sat, 11 Nov 1995 17:49:07 -0800
Subject: Digital QSLs
Message-ID: <199511120149.RAA20832 at>

At 10:23 AM 11/11/95 -0800, Peter Jennings wrote:
>As W6QHS has pointed out, it doesn't make much sense to transport a
>piece of cardboard half way around the world to confirm a radio contact.
>The technology now exists to send a QSL confirmation via email or
>packet using public key cryptography for message authentication.
I would hope the ARRL is looking into this, but carefully!  Public/private
key encryption appears to be the coming thing in many areas besides ham
radio, but it would be nice to have just ONE standard instead of dozens.  A
plea for a little coordination, please!

73, Bill  W7LZP
wrt at

>From Jan Seay <jans at>  Sun Nov 12 02:31:49 1995
From: Jan Seay <jans at> (Jan Seay)
Date: Sat, 11 Nov 1995 17:31:49 -0900 (AST)
Subject: e-QSLs
Message-ID: <Pine.HPP.3.91.951111172948.16487A-100000 at>

Right on, Roger! Like I said earlier, Those who can't
carry the flag shouldn't be in the parade. See ya  de KL7HF

On 11 Nov 1995, Roger G3SXW wrote:

> There's a vital element missing from the current discussion about QSLing
> by contesters and confirmations by e-mail. . . . .
> vast numbers of DXers simply      E  N  J  O  Y
> receiving QSL cards.
> Its not only about collecting points for awards.
> 73 de Roger/G3SXW.

>From Jim Walter <76353.1416 at>  Sun Nov 12 03:16:49 1995
From: Jim Walter <76353.1416 at> (Jim Walter)
Date: 11 Nov 95 22:16:49 EST
Subject: Kenwood Interface/Misc.
Message-ID: <951112031648_76353.1416_GHN81-1 at CompuServe.COM>

To:  Internet:CQ-CONTEST at TGV.COM

There was information on the reflector regarding Kenwood producing
a limited number of computer interfaces for I believe the TS-940. 
If you have any information please send direct.

I would also like to know if there are any Contest Clubs in the
Northern Indiana (Elkhart/SouthBend) area.

Jim Walter, WB0OLA
Compuserv 76353.1416

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list