[Dx-qsl] AR - VE7CC

[Osten B Magnusson]

Hi friends

and Happy New Year to all of you!  Starting an alternative
DXCC has been tried many times, and always a failure -
among DX'ers, at least of my generation, born 1941 and
licensed since 1962, there is and will always be only ONE
real DXCC!

73/DX de Osten SM5DQC    sm5dqc at areteadsl.se


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "rayfri" <rayfri at highstream.net>
To: "John Becker" <johnb3030 at comcast.net>
Cc: <dx-qsl at mailman.qth.net>; <frosty1 at pdq.net>
Sent: Saturday, December 31, 2005 6:12 PM
Subject: Re: [Dx-qsl] AR - VE7CC


> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> &quot;Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got...till
>> it's gone.&quot; 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 !!
>>
>>
>
>
> &quot;Don't it always seem to go that you don't know what you've got...till it's
> gone.&quot; 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 !!