[CQ-Contest] e QSL

[N7MAL]

Just to set the record straight I have never implied, suggested, or said anything about fraud or any kind of 'hanky-panky.' The guys, like you, who are advocating changing logs are doing/suggesting it to right a wrong.
73


MAL                  N7MAL
BULLHEAD CITY, AZ
http://www.ctaz.com/~suzyq/N7mal.htm

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Bill Turner 
  To: N7MAL 
  Cc: CQ Contest 
  Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2005 1:45
  Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] e QSL


  That would be a rare event, but if both N7ML and N7MAL sent QSL cards with the same date, time, mode and band, what would you deduce happened? My guess is they both believed they had a valid QSO and that station ABC busted one or both calls. What other explanation could there be? And if ABC did bust one or both calls, why not correct the error? Are you suspecting some kind of fraud on either station's part?

  --
  Bill, W6WRT


  _______________________________________________________________

  Original Message:

  N7MAL wrote: 
I have received many emails telling me the benefit of the doubt must go to logging error and send the QSL if the call is reasonably close. Here is a true scenario that has played out no less than 20 times in the past few years.
I call station ABC, he responds N7ML ur 599. If I recognize ABC busted the call I correct it but sometimes in heavy QRM I miss it. Sometimes ABC is actually responding to N7ML and I miss that to especially in a split operation. N7ML, Craig, is a real DXer and Contester, I run across him all the time.
Now I send ABC a card. What is ABC supposed to do, after all N7ML and N7MAL are only off by a letter and the time is right. ABC's only choice is to return my card marked not in the log. I'm sure there are many more similar scenario's with similar calls.
As unpopular as it seems what's in the log is what must be the determining factor.


MAL                 N7MAL