Personally, I think the new ARRL Logbook of the World policy of what we can
call "double-blind confirmation" is unnecessarily strict. What's the point? If
you and I want to create a fictitious QSO, we can do it easily. We submit the
information from both ends, and it is a QSO. Serious DX stations review their
logs to ensure QSOs are good. But, if I'm mobile and I work a good one, but I
don't log it, I'm not going to get the confirmation. And, if our clocks are off
by too much - no QSO. If we make an error in filling out the on-line QSL - no
QSO - and no way to track it.
What do the DXCC Rules say?
"2. Written Proof: Except in cases where the rules of Section IV apply, written
proof (e.g. QSL cards) of two-way communication (contacts) must be submitted
directly to ARRL Headquarters for all DXCC credits claimed . . . . Staff may
accept electronic confirmations when procedures to do so are adopted."
and,
"4. Confirmation data for two-way communications must include the call signs of
both stations, the Entity name as shown in the DXCC List, mode, and date, time
and band."
For about 65 years, confirmation in written form from the DX station -
solicited or unsolicited - has been the benchmark. This new double-blind
confirmation requirement definitely raises the bar for electronic QSLing.
It's always a pleasure to get unsolicited QSLs. It would be a pleasure to get
them electronically, too. The beauty of a cool QSL design - whether printed or
electronic is a welcome surprise - even if it is not a needed country.
Don't be fooled. This new QSL policy is really a major change in ARRL DXCC
policy. It is now being forced on eQSL in exchange for possible DXCC
accreditation - and it is a giant step in the wrong direction.
73,
Jim Idelson K1IR
email k1ir@designet.com
web http://www.designet.com/k1ir
|