1/Y/ou want to say that such a tricky way (presenting a fake card
without an application) should go unpunished? //
//Nick, UY0ZG /¨ Nick Nick you must hate me very much Hi. There was no
trick in my intention. We should imagine that the log of KH3C/KH5 was
re-write to electronic form long time later expedition and *put to the
LoTW on 26-12-2005 it is 15 years after expedition*. My log was that
time in 1990 in paper form as well and I did not find this qso in my
electronic log maybe because due to same problem of re-writing from
paper log. It was the main reason for asking DXCC office for appraisal
one. NO TRICKY BEHAVIOUR of mine.
/2/ On 3/23/2020 8:27 AM, K9FD wrote: //
//Well let me be the 2nd then to comment, //
//Its clear as friggin day, guy sent in a doctored card, pasted a
printer label //
//over the top of a QSO for another band, ARRL saw it in person and said //
//"Fake" card, and disqualified him //
//His gripe is he was just sending it to "test" them to check it out,
didnt really //
//mean to submit it, //
//If they would have just passed it through and given credit, do you
think he //
//would have said one word. //
//No translation needed, simple easy logic. Attitude or tone BS, //
//Facts are facts. //
//Merv K9FD /
Merv how many times I must say that the label does not cover any other
QSO on the QSL. If you have this QSL you will see that this expedition
QSLs have separate QSL for each band printed on label and covered by QSL
manager stamp. Virtually impossible to fake !!! But you and others did
not understand main point of this discussion. I opened this discussion
not for verifying any QSL card but judge only if mild damage as W9JJ
described is acceptable for DXCC 160m award further incidental
complement is acceptable.
/3/Based upon the supplied communications, it's unclear to me whether
there was an actual application made along with the submitted card or
not. Jarda claims not, but based on the disqualification, if it
followed its own rules, ARRL must have received one because... //
//The DXCC AWARD APPLICATION form states, "Required With Each New
Submission and Endorsements" //
//If the "required" application/fees and affirmed signature weren't
submitted, then he did not make an application and whether or not the
card is bogus should not matter. //
//So there should be one of two outcomes: //
//1) He submitted a signed application affirming that he followed all
of the rules, but submitted a bogus card. His removal is justified. //
//2) He did not submit a signed application but only asked for an
opinion about the card. He should be reinstated. //
//Seems pretty simple to me. //
//Wes N7WS
/
Oh YEEES !!!! Wes, you finally understand the basis of the " problem". I
feel damaged by the decision of the DXCC Committee because I did not
submit any request to increase my score on 160m band at all !!!!. I ask
for advice only. This fact can be simply documented by asking the DXCC
buro. That is why I am convinced that decision of DXCC Committee about
my exclusion from competition is deliberated. I can speculate who is
behind one. It seems to me that all HAMs they appeared behind me, after
verifying the authenticity of mine QSL 160m band and confession nr.1,
they influenced the commission's decision. All at the cost of breaking
DXCC rules. We all in front positions are old men so I don't know what
they're up to.... If it is so I personally do not want to be a member of
such a society.
73 Jarda,OK1RD
PS: a lot of HAMs listened on DXCC 160m standings asked me for sending
them QSL confirmation 160m QSO from my expeditions T30, T31,T32,T33,J8
e.t.c. I did not do it of course.
_________________
Searchable Archives: http://www.contesting.com/_topband - Topband Reflector
|