Fw: Re: [CQ-Contest] eQSL change of policy

[Rex Maner]

Quacks
I find that in most cases where I have one that isn't correct its is simply
a bad time or band in the Log that I uploaded or his log.  When U reject
just put in the time shown in Ur log and if he wants the card he can obtain
it that way.  I don't even look at the ards that come thru.  I respond when
I get  SASE /$  I have 5 years of cards at the buro that I may get some day.
I load logs to e-QSL right after a contest so I don't have to confirm them.
The recient chang at e-QSL makes for a bigger job but no BFD.  I still am
tring to work WAS.

Quack

----- Original Message -----
From: "ted demopoulos" <kr1g at hotmail.com>
To: <cq-contest at contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 03:10
Subject: Fwd: Re: [CQ-Contest] eQSL change of policy


> Jim,
>
> You are not quite right, although close. If the times are off or something
> else is wrong (and you probably won't know what, just that you worked
> P5/KR1G on 160 and the logs have been submitted and you don't have
credit),
> you would de *exactly* what you do today - send P5/KR1G's QSL manager,
> KC1XX, a note saying "man I know I'm in the log can you double check
> please?" And Matt may find a problem, like your call K1IR was logged
> correctly on the cheap one-ply toilet paper KR1G used for logging because
> his laptop ran erratically on P5 power but copied into the computer log
> incorrectly.
>
> As far as being too strict, blame me!! The biggest strength and reason for
> the prestige of the DXCC program is its security - yes, you can scam it.
> Print your own DL, and G and EA6 and PYOF cards and submit them and
they'll
> probably pass. Try that with a P5 or VU7 card and it gets *much* harder.
> They do catch cheaters quite often I'm told. Any eQSL system MUST be at
> least as secure! If its too secure and a too much of a hassle (the two go
> hand in hand), it can be loosened later. We did consider possible (in some
> cases probable) attacks and some of the "features" are designed especially
> for them. Yes, I am Paranoid - its my job :)
>
> 73
> Ted KR1G
>
> >From: Jim Idelson <k1ir at designet.com>
> >To: CQ-Contest Post <cq-contest at contesting.com>
> >Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] eQSL change of policy
> >Date: Wed, 3 Apr 2002 20:37:06 -0500
> >
> >Personally, I think the new ARRL Logbook of the World policy of what we
can
> >call "double-blind confirmation" is unnecessarily strict. What's the
point?
> >If
> >you and I want to create a fictitious QSO, we can do it easily. We submit
> >the
> >information from both ends, and it is a QSO. Serious DX stations review
> >their
> >logs to ensure QSOs are good. But, if I'm mobile and I work a good one,
but
> >I
> >don't log it, I'm not going to get the confirmation. And, if our clocks
are
> >off
> >by too much - no QSO. If we make an error in filling out the on-line
QSL -
> >no
> >QSO - and no way to track it.
> >
> >What do the DXCC Rules say?
> >
> >"2. Written Proof: Except in cases where the rules of Section IV apply,
> >written
> >proof (e.g. QSL cards) of two-way communication (contacts) must be
> >submitted
> >directly to ARRL Headquarters for all DXCC credits claimed . . . . Staff
> >may
> >accept electronic confirmations when procedures to do so are adopted."
> >
> >and,
> >
> >"4. Confirmation data for two-way communications must include the call
> >signs of
> >both stations, the Entity name as shown in the DXCC List, mode, and date,
> >time
> >and band."
> >
> >For about 65 years, confirmation in written form from the DX station -
> >solicited or unsolicited - has been the benchmark. This new double-blind
> >confirmation requirement definitely raises the bar for electronic QSLing.
> >
> >It's always a pleasure to get unsolicited QSLs. It would be a pleasure to
> >get
> >them electronically, too. The beauty of a cool QSL design - whether
printed
> >or
> >electronic is a welcome surprise - even if it is not a needed country.
> >
> >Don't be fooled. This new QSL policy is really a major change in ARRL
DXCC
> >policy. It is now being forced on eQSL in exchange for possible DXCC
> >accreditation - and it is a giant step in the wrong direction.
> >
> >73,
> >
> >Jim Idelson K1IR
> >email    k1ir at designet.com
> >web    http://www.designet.com/k1ir
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >CQ-Contest mailing list
> >CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> >http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos:
> http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>