[Dx-qsl] AR - VE7CC

[rayfri]

well then maybe it is time that the amateur radio community left the 
ARRL behind it its own dustbin of history when it comes to this 
particular issue .... and some other organization or group of hams offer 
similar awards like DXCC etc that WILL accept uploaded and printed off 
qsl cards.

After all ... ask yourself this question.    What in the heck makes an 
award more coveted or valuable just because it has the "sacred" initials 
of the ARRL on it than if it has another organizations name on it?   I, 
for one, dont turn eastward and bow and genuflect twice a day in homage 
to the ARRL.  If a club in Chile or Canada or the U.S. or anywhere else 
in the world acknowledges that I have worked
all states, or worked 100 or more countries, is that acknowledgement any 
LESS because they applauded and acknowledged me?
Is my pride in making those contacts any less ... or do I hang my head a 
little bit ... because I received a "well done" from some other group 
than the ARRL?    Maybe it is for YOU .. but it isnt for me.    In fact, 
I often apply for other organization's awards because the 
acknowledgement for a LOT LESS than what the ARRL "charges" for that 
same acknowledgement.  And I applaud those of you who accomplished a 
certain goal even if it isnt "officially applauded and endorsed" by 
being "bought" from the ARRL.
In reality, that is all we are doing ... we are PAYING the ARRL to 
"recognize" our accomplishment.   So why not pay someone else
less and get the same acknowledgement?   It means the same ... unless 
you value the "blessing" of the ARRL more than other ham groups.  I 
guess it may go back to "you get what you pay for".... sometimes.

Take a look at the old ARRL Rag Chewers Club award.  They decided that 
not enough people were applying to warrant their time and effort to 
acknowledge that accomplishment. WHO CARES HOW MANY APPLIED?    You have 
a stack of blank awards on the shelf and whether ONE person or ONE 
MILLION people applied ... you fill one out, slap a stamp on the 
envelope and mail it out.
But, because there werent enough applications to make it "financially 
worthwhile" or "cost effective" they said forget it, they werent going 
to acknowledge an accomplishment they themselves had championed for 
years.    
I got one of those .. to me .. coveted awards as a Novice.  It got lost 
in a move and I had hoped to get a replacement, but the ARRL had deep 
sixed the program.   SO, instead I happily applied for a "replacement" 
with a new qso and application to SPAR which
started issuing their version in response to the ARRL abandonment of 
hams in this instance.     It was supplied by downloading and
printing.   All filled out and ready to frame..     It means as much to 
me "accomplishment wise" as if I had my old ARRL issued one.
I know I met the requirements .... and that's what matters.  I have a 
clear conscience.   If someone else lies to get one, then theirs is
worth what it is  to them.    Makes no never mind to me....

If you tell someone you have a certain award, no one can really prove or 
disprove whether you earned it legitimately or not...
You tell me you earned DXCC ...  only you know if you did it 
legitimately or not.   I'm not going to ask to see all 100 cards before 
I decide whether I am impressed or not   HI HI.    And, I'm not going to 
be any MORE impressed if yours was issued by the ARRL than if it was 
issued by the Radio Club of Brazil, or the Russian Amateur Radio Society 
or the Southern Tip of Charleston South Carolina Radio Group.  To me, 
ARRL staff has not been "annointed" with holy water or anything more 
special than any other group.

Personally, I also prefer the pasteboards.  When I was a novice in the 
60s my walls were covered with them from all over ...
contributed to the atmosphere of the shack HI HI.     
But, If I were able to download a qsl from a DX station, it would mean 
as much to me as a mailed one, because I would know that
I worked that station and it was a legitimate qsl card and contact.    
As for the increasing price of getting a mailed one ... I too have
experienced that, and so far I have just chalked it up to the price of 
the hobby.   The cost of just about all hobbies has gone up over the 
year.... whether it is photography, rock collecting, skiing, etc....     
If we enjoy a hobby, we accept the cost to a certain point.  I havent 
reached that "point" yet where I would quit collecting qsl cards just 
because of the cost of postage...

Back to the ARRL and its "security" concerns about uploaded and 
downloaded cards being used for their awards....
It comes down to a person's honesty....   TRUE, someone can phony up a 
bunch of cards if they wanted to bad enough in order to apply for and 
get DXCC and WAS, etc ....   BUT, if a person did that, HE HIMSELF would 
know it wasnt a legitimately earned award, and to that person it would 
be worth whatever it was worth....     Others may know or suspect that 
it wasnt worth more than the paper it was printed on...        Other's 
who earned the awards legitimately with real contacts and cards would 
have the pride and knowledge that they earned it legitimately .. and 
those who knew them or even didnt know them, would know or suspect that 
the award was earned legitimately, and the appropriate value would be 
with that award.

I find it interesting and somewhat paradoxical that the ARRL with all of 
its championing of "new technology" would refuse to recognize the facts 
about awards and qsl cards and hold firm to the good old fashioned post 
mark or signature as "proof" of the authenticity of a card.   Many cards 
now days .... especially those from DX stations and their managers, dont 
even have either a postmark or a signature...     they come in envelopes 
or through a bureau in an envelope .. and there is often nothing more 
than a stamp that says "verified by X" ....  which even a high school 
kid could phony up..       So the ARRL needs to practice what it 
preaches about moving into the new century when it comes to qsling and 
awards....  instead of having a double standard, which it already has on 
so many other issues.

As I said earlier ... I know if I am being honest or not.   And, IF I 
should ever want an award bad enough to phony up confirmations and fool 
an awards committee .. then the award is worth what it is worth to 
me.    If my award doesnt impress anyone else, well  "to each his own as 
Mrs Murphy said as she kissed the cow goodnight"....

Ray  WA7ITZ

John Becker wrote:

>> Ernie seems to forget that many of us are QSL card collectors more
>> than just awards chasers.  We really do want to have and keep the
>> QSLs, a fine tradition of the Amateur Radio service.  Therefore we
>> don't want to provide the people who we work an alternative way of
>> getting a confirmation from us.
>>
>> 73, Fred, K3ZO
>>
> I think that without a doubt, LOTW is the future of QSLing. And I say
> this as a DXer who still keeps only a paper log, and who has only
> manually uploaded a few dozen QSOs to LOTW just to see what credits
> might be available. But having said that, I also very much treasure
> having the physical QSL cards as a visible memento of memorable QSOs.
>
> The cost of obtaining the physical QSLs by mail certainly has risen in
> recent years, and no doubt will continue to do so. But there COULD be an
> alternative that would provide the best of both worlds. The eQSL system
> allows participants to upload custom-designed QSLs which the recipients
> can download and print. ARRL doesn't accept these for award credit
> because of lack of adequate security. But I know of no TECHNICAL reason
> why the security of LOTW and the printable QSLs of eQSL couldn't be
> merged to provide a secure, printable QSL over the Internet.
>
> I assume that the security of LOTW involves a unique encrypted ID for
> each QSO entered into the system. It should be possible to generate a
> unique bar code from these encrypted IDs which could be printed on each
> eQSL. While it would still be possible for someone to alter an eQSL to
> produce a bogus card that would LOOK good, it would be impossible for
> them to generate a valid bar code for a bogus QSO.
>
> For award credit, ARRL could either accept data directly from LOTW data,
> or scan the bar code from the eQSL at gatherings where field-checking of
> QSLs is presently done.
>
> I have suggested this idea to a couple of ARRL staffers over the last
> couple of years, but the responses I have received have been
> disappointing. They didn't seem to accept the idea that what I suggested
> would yield an eQSL that was as secure as LOTW. Possibly they didn't
> have the technical background to fully comprehend my suggestion, or
> possibly there is bad blood between the LOTW and eQSL developers.
>
> As far as I know, there is nothing proprietary about the eQSL system
> which would prevent ARRL from incorporating the functionality of an
> eQSL-like system into LOTW without the involvement of the current eQSL
> organization.
>
> 73 and HNY to all,
>
> John, K9MM
>
>
>
> "Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've 
> got...till it's gone." from Big Yellow Taxi (Joni Mitchell) but 
> also true about QSL.NET if more users don't open their wallets and 
> help financially. Please contribute TODAY !!
>
>