[RTTY] CQ to accept eQSL for Awards..

[Phil Sussman]

My 2-cents:

Fraud goes back to the first days of radio. Once all stations 
were 'pirates'. Today fraudulent stations and operators still
exist. Some of them are government sanctioned, where a getting a
ham license is merely a matter of paying the right official. As 
political entities come and go, licensing authorities can abruptly 
change or be completely eliminated. Sanctioning (eg. DXCC) is
inexact and challenging!

I believe that we sometimes forget is that Ham Radio is a HOBBY, 
not a profession. Over the years some have transitioned into an
<absolute serious> contester mindset. In many cases contesting has 
ceased to be a hobby. Rather it has become an exact science where
all logs must be cross-checked since there is a total lack of trust.

Next someone will object if your exact location is not documented as
well - thus rendering all QSOs from that QTH corrupt. Should past 
related WAS, winners, certifications, etc. be revoked retroactively?

The exchange of QSLs by any means -- paper - email, etc. can always be
forged. And -- even if you fully prove and document an individual -- 
that does NOT eliminate related fraudulent activity.

We now have become so preoccupied with the 'validity' of a call
that we overlook both unintentional errors and government 
sanctioned fraudulent operation.

Once upon a time it was assumed that submissions were made in good
faith. Fraud was always known to exist; however, it was considered
such a small fraction as to be inconsequential. Today you are 
considered invalid until you PROVE otherwise -- and it's a real shame! 

Horrors: Imagine a WAS certificate to issued a phoney ham who never 
even owned a radio! (Yep!)

Or: Retroactively, invalidating and revoking certificates because 
years later past QSOs were 'found to be invalid'. 

Has Ham Radio ceased being a FUN HOBBY? Has QSLing turned into a 
Police State? I have QSL cards from unlicensed pirate stations that 
were on the high seas. How invalid are they? Think about it! 

Hopefully I've made my point while being respectful of all. 

END OF SOAP BOX

73 de Phil - N8PS

---------

Quoting "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists at subich.com>:

> 
> 
> > I needn't have to remind you that the LoTW requirement for a 
> > copy of an identity document applies to >>non-U.S.<< licensees. 
> > What the FCC does is irrelevant.
> 
> That's correct with respect to Logbook of the World (and one 
> reason ARRL does not require a license copy from US licensees). 
> However it is entirely on point with regard to the integrity 
> of eQSL.  Quite simply, I can print to pdf from the web any 
> US license, set up a bogus account on eQSL.cc and e-mail 
> the pdf from a hotmail, gmail, etc free web account and 
> become "AG" for any call I would like.  
> 
> With no restriction to "prove identity," eQSL is no more secure 
> than e-mailed PDF cards.  BTW, LotW "proves identity" for US 
> licensees my mailing the post card to the address in the FCC 
> database.  To game that system an individual would need to 
> commit fraud with the FCC.  Security for US amateurs with LotW 
> is actually more stringent than for those in any other country. 
> 
> > I challenge you to demonstrate how little a copy of a license 
> > document proves by supplying us with a photocopy/scan of 
> > ANY non-U.S. license of which you are not the licensee Joe.  
> 
> All I need is a copy of a legitimate license for the country 
> in question.  Document/graphical editing tools are quite 
> sophisticated modifying a legitimate license is not very 
> difficult but I have no reason to obtain the materials with 
> which to create phantom foreign licenses to game LotW.
>  
> > But in the ID-theft aware environment we live today, even I 
> > would have to think twice about sending the League the equivalent 
> > of my SS number or driver's license number for no good reason.
> 
> If foreign governments had a database equivalent to the FCC 
> license database available to the public, I would bet that 
> the ARRL would use it to make registration of non-US users 
> easier.  I do not know of any such government run system.  
> 
> Requiring a copy of a government issued ID is as good a form 
> of fraud prevention as is available unless you can get IARU 
> member societies to register users by checking IDs in person. 
> 
> In any case, none of the arguments over LotW procedures address 
> the documented flaws and fraud in eQSL ... nor does it address 
> the refusal of the operators of eQSL to terminate users known 
> to be committing fraud on a regular and repeated basis.  Their 
> failure to take action to maintain the integrity of eQSL makes 
> eQSL "QSLs" worthless and makes a mockery of those awards that 
> accept such questionable "confirmations." 
> 
> 73, 
> 
>    ... Joe, W4TV 
>  
>