Topband: DXCC Committee

[Jarda]

1/Y/ou want to say that such a tricky way (presenting a fake card 
without an application) should go unpunished? //
//Nick, UY0ZG /¨ Nick Nick you must hate me very much Hi. There was no 
trick in my intention. We should imagine that the log of KH3C/KH5 was 
re-write to electronic form long time later expedition and *put to the 
LoTW on 26-12-2005 it is 15 years after expedition*. My log was that 
time in 1990 in paper form as well and I did not find this qso in my 
electronic log maybe because due to same problem of re-writing from 
paper log. It was the main reason for asking DXCC office for appraisal 
one. NO TRICKY BEHAVIOUR of mine.

/2/ On 3/23/2020 8:27 AM, K9FD wrote: //
//Well let me be the 2nd then to comment, //
//Its clear as friggin day,  guy sent in a doctored card,  pasted a 
printer label //
//over the top of a QSO for another band,  ARRL saw it in person and said //
//"Fake" card,  and disqualified him //
//His gripe is he was just sending it to "test" them to check it out,  
didnt really //
//mean to submit it, //
//If they would have just passed it through and given credit,  do you 
think he //
//would have said one word. //
//No translation needed,  simple easy logic.    Attitude or tone BS, //
//Facts are facts. //
//Merv K9FD /

Merv how many times I must say that the label does not cover any other 
QSO on the QSL. If you have this QSL you will see that this expedition 
QSLs have separate QSL for each band printed on label and covered by QSL 
manager stamp. Virtually impossible to fake !!! But you and others did 
not understand main point of this discussion. I opened this discussion 
not for verifying any QSL card but judge only if mild damage as W9JJ 
described is acceptable for DXCC 160m award further incidental 
complement is acceptable.

/3/Based upon the supplied communications, it's unclear to me whether 
there was an actual application made along with the submitted card or 
not.  Jarda claims not, but based on the disqualification, if it 
followed its own rules, ARRL must have received one because... //
//The DXCC AWARD APPLICATION form states, "Required With Each New 
Submission and Endorsements" //
//If the "required" application/fees and affirmed signature weren't 
submitted, then he did not make an application and whether or not the 
card is bogus should not matter. //
//So there should be one of two outcomes: //
//1)  He submitted a signed application affirming that he followed all 
of the rules, but submitted a bogus card.  His removal is justified. //
//2)  He did not submit a signed application but only asked for an 
opinion about the card.  He should be reinstated. //
//Seems pretty simple to me. //
//Wes  N7WS
/

Oh YEEES !!!! Wes, you finally understand the basis of the " problem". I 
feel damaged by the decision of the DXCC Committee because I did not 
submit any request to increase my score on 160m band at all !!!!. I ask 
for advice only. This fact can be simply documented by asking the DXCC 
buro. That is why I am convinced that decision of DXCC Committee about 
my exclusion from competition is deliberated. I can speculate who is 
behind one. It seems to me that all HAMs they appeared behind me, after 
verifying the authenticity of mine QSL 160m band and confession nr.1, 
they influenced the commission's decision. All at the cost of breaking 
DXCC rules. We all in front positions are old men so I don't know what 
they're up to.... If it is so I personally do not want to be a member of 
such a society.

73 Jarda,OK1RD

PS: a lot of HAMs listened on DXCC 160m standings asked me for sending 
them QSL confirmation 160m QSO from my expeditions T30, T31,T32,T33,J8 
e.t.c. I did not do it of course.