> If you don't log a QSO and forget to fill out or send a card, and have no
> way of following up on it later because of a lack of a log entry (mobile,
> portable or otherwise) who's fault is this and why is this blame now being
> assigned to LotW which is still a work in progress?
There is an implicit assumption in the above statement that may not be quite
accurate. It appears to assume that both sides of a qso care about awards
and QSLs. I, for example, don't really care about awards and qsl cards. On
the other hand, I sure want to help those who do by confirming their qso
with me. I don't send QSL cards by mail --- a bit too expensive for my
simple life -- however, eQSLs are ideal. Although, I must admit I have never
initiated an eQSL but I have responded to hundreds of them.
By law I do not have to keep a general log. In practice I don't keep a
general log. I do keep contest logs. After, they are scored, they are
compressed, archived and put on a shelf. Too be quite honest I do not have
the time to search through contest logs, and some months I may have 4
contests logs, to confirm each QSL or eQSL that comes to my mail and
e-mail.boxes.
I rely on the honor system - if a fellow amateur wants an eQSL card from me
then all he has to do is send me an eQSL. I will assume he values our qso
and that he is honorable enough to provide me with accurate information
about our qso in his eQSL . And until the recent change of policy at eQSL.cc
I use to "eQSL 100 percent" but it seems they are forcing me to change my
words to "I never QSL". What a pity.
As others have pointed out, QSLing "is fundamentally an honor system and we
should be striving for ways to implement that honor system as painlessly as
possible."
.. sylvan
????
----------------
Sylvan Katz, VE5ZX
Saskatoon, SK
"A Novel Perspective of Amateur Radio Contesting" at
http://www.dynamicforesight.com/~ve5zx
|