Why the excitement about eQSL when the integrity of the DXCC program
& other awards of significance have been shot for years by the likes of us
who realize we are not the personification of logging perfection?
W6WRT may have simplified things with off-by-one-letter I think it was,
but just like logging the QSO to begin with, dealing with a potential logging
error after the fact may not be such a straight forward judgement call.
If applied to some of the recent expeditions, K0HB's & N7MAL's approach
to doing things means there are hundreds, if not thousands of folks who
had what they thought was a good Q, but would be told to sod off when
it comes to a QSL.
Taken to an extreme, I should be deleting Qs from my logs, as the same
process is behind my replying to W3LPL when I copy only W3LxL or not
ask W7WA to repeat my report because there was QRN when he sent
599 WA or - even better - I fill in the serial number I know I was just sent
but couldn't copy, when it comes to my turn to work some guy I've been
calling for a while & have heard work the last few Qs.
Riff-raff or real radioman? Seems we're all the former to some extent.
73, VR2BrettGraham
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|