Topband
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Topband: : Re: JT1CO QSL

To: "Kevin Schavee" <n0cwrham@gmail.com>, <topband@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: Topband: : Re: JT1CO QSL
From: "Glenn Wyant" <va3dx@sympatico.ca>
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2009 20:05:30 -0500
List-post: <topband@contesting.com">mailto:topband@contesting.com>

LOTW    your loss

( paper QSLs )  vs  LOTW does not make the qso trivial

Having a paper qsl vs a LOTW confirmation is equally valid

" The qso was made "  but confirmed by a different medium, thats all.

If you want " paper qsls " thats fine, but dont begrudge others for
their preferences .....

" To each his own " has merit , respect  other viewpoints.

Subject: Topband: : Re: JT1CO QSL


> "Wouldn't it be nice if we could help topbanders "
> LOTW means nothing to me.
> How did our QSO's get so trivial that a a nch on an ARRL server was ok?
> Real cards! Please.
>
> I've had great results with green stamps to Mongolia.
>
> There is William Plum's DX stamp serviceand  works nice if you have 
> doubts.
> plumdx@msn.com
>
> 73
> Kevin
> _______________________________________________
> 160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with respect. - TF4M
> 

_______________________________________________
160 meters is a serious band, it should be treated with respect. - TF4M

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>