John,

I remember the same lack of "RR73" happened with one of the DXpeditions. The website said they would not be sending RR73 presumably to maximize QSOs.  Like the MSHV mode, some operators have their own way of doing things.  

73 de Ed

On Sat, Apr 13, 2024 at 10:53 PM John Ellis <john.np2b@gmail.com> wrote:
Pete,et.al

Today I worked a station in Iran. 
One problem, he doesn't send 
RR73. He doesn't send RR73 
to anyone. Your only confirmation 
is in his log or getting a QSL from 
his QSL manager. 

I sent him an e-mail and he actually 
confirmed the QSO directly with 
me with a valid time and date. So 
there is no question that I am in his 
log since he confirmed the qso with  
me directly via e-mail, 

Since he is in my log and I have 
confirmation that I am in his, even 
though I did not receive a direct 
RRR or RR73, should that really 
count as a valid QSO? 

I have not counted it as a valid 
QSO yet, pending a ruling from
the "rules committee." What do 
you all think? 

73,  
John, NP2B 


--

John Ellis         (NP2B)  
1149 Mockingbird Lane  
The Villages, FL 32163  

telephone 352 633-2910  
facsimile  352 633-0401
mobile     340 513-4928  


Virus-free.www.avg.com
______________________________________________________________
TVARC mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/tvarc
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:TVARC@mailman.qth.net

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html