+++++++++++++++++++++ Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2001 14:53:39 -0600 From: "Rod N0RC" Subject: [Elecraft] Time for eQSLs? I think so. Call it my little effort to reduce the work and anxiety of our Postal workers, and paper mail recipients. So, to that end I will be QSLing via http://www.eQSL.cc To get things kicked off I sent eQSLs to everyone I QSOed with during the 10/2 ARS Sprint, and the 9/24 NJQRP Club HB Sprint. And, I will continue to send eQSL everyone I QSO with in our QRP sprints and contests. Ditto for General QSOs-Hey, it's the finally courtesy of a QSO, and easy to do electronically. If you're registered with eQSL please check your inbox, and if the spirit moves you, contact me with comments on how the card looks. I'm experimenting with ADIF uploads. If you are not registered with eQSL you can access the site at http://www.eQSL.cc study the offering and decide if its right for you. If you are concerned about data entry on the web, consider a log program like xmlog. It's free, and it exports ADIF files that can be imported in to eQSL automatically. (PRETTY COOL!) If you need a paper card for an award contact me, I'll be happy to oblige. Finally, I don't want this message to start a flame war about eQSL vs Paper QSL. We've been there and don't need to go back. This is my personal effort to thumb my nose at those terrorist B*******S, reduce work and make things a bit safer. 73, Rod N0RC MAD AS HELL AND DOING WHAT I CAN TO Ft Collins, CO DEFEAT TERRORISM/TERRORISTS!!!! +++++++++++++++++ Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 11:01:58 -0800 From: "N7SG K7FD" Subject: [Elecraft] To my QRP friends... Taking a cue from Rod, N0RC, I have re-registered with www.eqsl.cc and updated my qsl. In light of recent events, this method of 'a final courtesy of a qso' seems to make more sense to me. If you wish, please feel free to use eqsl as another avenue to confirm K7FD. And as always, I have traditional cards, too. 73 John K7FD ++++++++++++++++++ Date: Sat, 27 Oct 2001 18:19:57 -0700 From: Lee Hopper To: qrp-l at Lehigh.EDU, rod at n0rc.com Subject: [109765] Re: Time for eQSLs? Message-ID: <3BDB5D3D.40300 at qwest.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Rod - I just have to say what a good idea I think you have here. I went to my first dx club meeting last night - at a pizza place where we all sorted qsl cards from all over the world. This was a great group of guys - some of whom read this reflector. They like to talk dx, go on dxpeditions, show their rare & amusing qsl cards. Paper qsl cards may never be completely replaced, I don't know...but I think we subject ourselves to unnecessary risks by receiving paper. I'd like to react to this new threat by limiting unnecessary risks. Lee Hopper, KD7CTF Portland, OR, USA ++++++++++++++++++ Date: Sun, 28 Oct 2001 16:19:51 -0800 From: "John Clifford" Subject: [Elecraft] eQSL and DXCC? Obligatory K2 mention: I use my own Access-based logging program, that interfaces to both the K2 via KIO2 and the Buckmaster HamCall CD-ROM. I can output ADIF files thru a simple query/save macro, so this makes using eQSL very easy. However, I have only used eQSL to send out PSK31 cards. The ARRL's Logbook of the World (LOTW) is strictly going to be a repository for DXCC (and perhaps other certificate) logs. LOTW will not support general QSL-ing, like eQSL. However, contrary to eQSL's "Position Statement" on LOTW and how the ARRL won't play ball with them, it would be very easy for eQSL to support LOTW (and thus ARRL DXCC, etc.). LOTW requires that users register and get a private password (digital signature), that must be included in each QSL sent to LOTW. All eQSL has to do is to have registered and approved (send in a copy of their license and it has been verified) users also submit their digital signature. Then, eQSL can built the LOTW-compliant file and transmit it to LOTW, whether by a web-based, email-based, or TCP/IP-based program. Since ARRL is supplying free software and documentation (for third-party developers) how hard would this be for eQSL to support? (Not very hard, IMO.) I like eQSL although I think the user interface needs to be improved... it's still fairly primitive. I'd like to see eQSL support ADIF download as well as upload (so you can keep your local log in sync with eQSL, e.g., when you receive eQSL cards), as well as support the downloading of eQSL card images. The ideal would be for eQSL to require user to set up their card in EPS format, with a specific-sized area in a specific (X,Y) location on the card for the actual QSL report. Then, QSL-ing would be very simple and the cards would look great, too. I for one would like to see less $$ given to the US Postal Service and especially the corrupt third-world postal services (I'm tired of having my green stamps ripped off by thieving postal employees). Re K2 Remote... I'd rather see the KPA2 finished first, but the software is undoubtedly both easier and closer to completion. John Clifford KD7KGX Heathkit HW-9 WARC/HFT-9/HM-9 Elecraft K2 #1678 /KSB2/KIO2/KBT2/KAT2/KNB2/KAF2 ...waiting _eagerly_ for KPA2! Ten-Tec Omni VI/Opt1 email: kd7kgx at arrl.net ++++++++++++++++++ Subject: RE: EQSL Service Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2002 20:18:41 -0500 From: "Allen R. Brier" To: "Al - N1API" , "Ten-Ten Discussion List" , "Ten Meter. Ten Ten" I AGREE 100%. I TOLD THEM THE SAME THING! Allen R. Brier N5XZ N.I.C.E.T. SET Fire Alarm Systems BriTech Systems Incorporated 2018 Old Dixie Drive Richmond, Texas USA 77469-6811 281-342-1590 281-342-0940 (fax) 713-705-4801 (Cell Phone/Voice Mail/Pager) BriTech at csi.com -----Original Message----- From: owner-tentenlist at ten-ten.org [mailto:owner-tentenlist at ten-ten.org] On Behalf Of Al - N1API Sent: 10 April, 2002 4:48 PM To: Ten-Ten Discussion List; Ten Meter. Ten Ten Subject: EQSL Service I usually answer EQSL's as a courtesy to the operators who send them. I just checked my EQSL box and there were, (and still are), a number of them to be replied to. EQSL has changed their system and now instead of just clicking on "reply" you have to go to the actual log where the contact is and fill in a date, (just like a real QSL). The problem is that you can not view the QSL until you reply to it which means you have to reference to the date and time of the QSL before you answer it. I make probably 2 to 4 thousand QSO's a year. Many of them are repeats like paper chasers, 10-10'er, county hunters contesters, DX and rag chews. Many are new first time contacts over the same spread of activities. Therefore, my log are spread over two paper logs, WIN1010 daily or contest logs, (each contest gets a different name of course), and WIN1010 county hunter. Also I use CT for 3 or 4 contests a year (again each contest has a different name thus another log), and another program called KWIKWIN which I use for logging County Hunting on 10, 15 and 20 meters. You can probably see the difficulty I have then looking over ALL these media for ONE call and ONE QSO. How about the contester that I've worked on three bands in three contests in one year, (there are 4 QSLs from M4U there)? If I get one EQSL from him for which QSO and on which band did he want the EQSL for? I've just sent EQSL a message saying that their new system sucks! (To put it bluntly). If they don't go back to their old system them I'm checking out and not checking back in! -73- Al N1API +++++++++++++++++++ Subject: RE: April issue 1010 news Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 14:06:17 -0500 From: "Allen R. Brier" To: , "Edward Palagyi" , , , , The problem with the new eQSL setup is that in order to even view a QSL, you must upload your log information. The only information given is the callsign of the other station and the month. For some of us who either haven't had the time to computerize logs or don't want to, the only way to find a QSO is to search through an entire month of QSO's. That is totally impractical for most of us. Until they modify the system to make it easier to search for a QSO, I won't be using it. They should at least give the full information, i.e. date, time, etc. Then I would be willing to look up the contact in my log. (This can be forwarded to the eQSL folks). Allen R. Brier N5XZ ++++++++++++++++++++ Subject: RE: April issue 1010 news Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 15:51:53 -0500 From: "Allen R. Brier" To: "Mike Urich" , "Edward Palagyi" , , , , I'm all for change, if it is done the right way. Change for change's sake is not always right. eQSL's change is not right. They should still allow a user to look up a contact in their log, without having to go through a whole month. The eQSL is not confirmed until the receiver confirms it (even with the old method). This is no different than receiving a paper QSL. Normally, it is confirmed after looking it up in the log book. eQSL's argument is that contacts could be confirmed without looking them up in the log. The same could be done with a paper QSL. What is the difference?? If there is a difference, I would like for someone to explain it to me (that would, of course, have to be an eQSL user). Allen R. Brier N5XZ +++++++++++++++++++ Subject: Re: [TenMeters] Re: April issue 1010 news Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 14:45:21 -0700 From: "Dick" To: "Allen R. Brier" , "Edward Palagyi" , , , , , "Mike Urich" Sounds like Mike just described part of the eQSL Service and the ARRL's new Logbook of the World which should be running later this year. Since both services offer Electronic based Awards within the same idea with auto-updated on their servers as folks upload their logs. The part that everyone is having problems with are those who do not upload logs, rather they whish to respond to their eQSL's one by one. In doing that eQSL has built in some security measures to insure you are who you claim to be and the QSO has taken place at the same time, date etc. eQSL would very much like to be accepted in all the circles of Awards Programs, but the cheaters are out there and ARRL, 10-10 International and others are very concerned about the security of the electronics age, thus some of the reason eQSL is trying to meet those needs. Mike stated it is pretty easy to set up a server to handle this for the multitude. I can't verify the ease of doing so myself, not being a programmer. But I suspect it is not that easy, especially when we don't have Utopia to live in. Then building in the security measures.....Well ARRL has been at it for a couple years now, and it still is not ready. How easy is that?? QSL's........If you don't keep logs due to being mobile and can't write while driving, you will never be able to verify QSO's, so should not bother QSLing either since every response to a QSL Card is a guess-by-golly. If you enjoy Mobile contacts, and wish to log information, you'll find a way.... One way to do it is use a pocket tape recorder, some come with voice activation. You could speak the Date, and approximate time of contact, even be it local time to transpose later when putting the QSO data into a real log or logging program. If you just plain don't like logging, that's OK too, as you don't enjoy the fine art of QSL Card collection. I believe a great QSO deserves the courtesy of a QSL Card to be cherished for a lifetime, as a reminder of the fine QSO. 73's de dick nc6v ------------------------------------------------------------------- Thought for today: "A man is only as good as what he loves." ----Sail Bellow, American author --------------------------------------------------------------- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Urich" To: "Allen R. Brier" ; "Edward Palagyi" ; ; ; ; Sent: Sunday, April 14, 2002 11:17 AM Subject: [TenMeters] Re: April issue 1010 news > > The eQSL format has been changed and almost impossible to verify a QSL in > a > > reasonable time. I have discontinued using eQSL system. > > Ed KN4Y +++++++++++++++++ Subject: Re: RE: April issue 1010 news Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:07:12 -0400 From: Edward Palagyi To: "Mike Urich" , tentenlist at ten-ten.org, TenMeters at egroups.com, SNITT at egroups.com, W0HIK at aol.com, "Allen R. Brier" I used eQSL before it was changed. After a contest I send in the log using e-mail, then I print out a paper log for my files and history. When a QSL comes in I check my paper log, cause I know the date and time of the contact. ASfter a contest I have have 400 or 500 contacts on the same date and no way to serach. So unless I am given the date and time I will not even bother to try and find the contact. I need the information I get when receiving a QSL card. I do not send out QSL's but reply to all I receive. eQSL had a system that worked. Why fix something that ain't broke. Ed KN4Y >I'm all for change, if it is done the right way. Change for change's sake is >not always right. eQSL's change is not right. They should still allow a user >to look up a contact in their log, without having to go through a whole >month. +++++++++++++++++++ Subject: Re: RE: April issue 1010 news Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:07:12 -0400 From: Edward Palagyi To: "Mike Urich" , tentenlist at ten-ten.org, TenMeters at egroups.com, SNITT at egroups.com, W0HIK at aol.com, "Allen R. Brier" I used eQSL before it was changed. After a contest I send in the log using e-mail, then I print out a paper log for my files and history. When a QSL comes in I check my paper log, cause I know the date and time of the contact. ASfter a contest I have have 400 or 500 contacts on the same date and no way to serach. So unless I am given the date and time I will not even bother to try and find the contact. I need the information I get when receiving a QSL card. I do not send out QSL's but reply to all I receive. eQSL had a system that worked. Why fix something that ain't broke. Ed KN4Y >I'm all for change, if it is done the right way. Change for change's sake is >not always right. eQSL's change is not right. They should still allow a user >to look up a contact in their log, without having to go through a whole >month. ++++++++++++++++++++ Subject: Re: [TenMeters] RE: April issue 1010 news Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 20:40:31 -0700 From: "Dick" To: "Mike Urich" , "Ten-Ten Discussion List" , "Ten Meter. Ten Ten" , "Al - N1API" The most popular logging software programs, including the contesting programs will support ADIF. ADIF is a means to transpose the log data in a standard format for export, to be used to import into many other logging programs. eQSL uses this means of import. I'm not sure what the Logbook of the World will end up with, but most likely will support ADIF too. So that should be no problem with any import/export from/to any logging program you use. If yours does not support export/import in ADIF, perhaps its time to query the author about incorporating this, and if they will not, then get on board with one who does. Most of the major Logging Programs existing today, some advertise in QST, will support most of the major Awards tracking and even prepare the Application Forms accepted by the Awards Sponsors. They usually will prepare QSL Labels in many formats, and Address labels as well as QSL tracking. Several of the major Software Programs are already producing or will soon produce Windows versions. The rest still operate in DOS, but function nicely out of a DOS Shell. 73's de dick nc6v ++++++++++++++++++++ Subject: Re: April issue 1010 news Date: Sun, 14 Apr 2002 21:25:48 -0700 From: "Dick" To: "Edward Palagyi" , , , , While a lot of you are bemoaning and quitting over the changes eQSL has made, have you reviewed some of the read topics on the welcome page to see what the mangement has to say... Or have you sent a message to the folks who run eQSL telling them of your concerns? I'd bet they would show you some courtesy with a resonse. They are also open to suggestions..... suppose someone asked them to post the Date and Times so you could refer to your logs??? Who know what could happen, if you don't try?? 73's de dick nc6v +++++++++++++++++++++ From: "Dave Sergeant" To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 15:12:52 -0000 Subject: [Elecraft] Re: electronic QSLs On 10 Feb 2003 at 4:01, wa2dkg wrote: > Unfortunately, all this assumes that everyone has a computer, which is > not the case...I am just as amazed that people don't realize that, RS > being a case in point...They discontinued their paper catalog and > advise us to look them up on the internet...I live on a normal, > average street in a normal, average town and I know for a fact that, > out of 20 homes, there are only 3 computer owners on the block besides > myself...Of course, none of them are hams... Clearly there are some without computers or connection to the internet, and there is no suggestion that paper QSLs will disappear. However the growth of internet connectivity among amateurs in recent years has been nothing short of miraculous. I don't have the actual figures, but it seems that up to 95% of contest logs are submitted electronically these days. At a recent amateur radio forum the lecturer asked those who weren't on the internet to put their hands up - nobody did. And you yourself are clearly on the internet as you use this reflector. Regardless of what you say, current usage of eQSL indicates how far this has become an accepted method. 73 Dave G3YMC +++++++++++++++++++ Subject: RE: [Elecraft] Re: electronic QSLs Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 08:47:41 -0800 From: "Tom Taylor (EHOME)" To: > Regardless of what you say, current usage of eQSL indicates how far=20 > this has become an accepted method. ...which isn't particularly far at this point. eQSL'ing is like bulk email advertising -- it's easy to send out a million messages, but the return "hit" rate must be very low. I've been sending out eQSLs since Sept. 2000 and my return rate is dismal. I've "sent" 3842 eQSLs and have received 253 in return; a hit rate of 6.5%. Fortunately, the effort to send that many cards is about the same as filling out 5 paper QSLs.=20 Tom N7T ++++++++++++++++++ To: elecraft at mailman.qth.net Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2003 18:09:15 +0000 From: k6iii at juno.com Subject: [Elecraft] Re: Electronic QSLs Well, at first glance, I though eQSLing was a step in the right direction. I even uploaded my log ADI files after each contest.... Now I've decided to no longer do that - figure I'm just spamming. I still visit my eQSL account about once a month and reply to many unsolicited Contest eQSLs (like so much spam) - I suspect they are not wanted, but I make the effort to reply. It takes a lot of time to do this, checking the logs, etc... - thank goodness I am retired! I'm getting cards for contacts from over 5 years ago. Unfortunately, I lost those logs (Computer crashes, etc...), so it takes even more time to Reject the card with explanation. Not sure why anyone would want a common CA QSL, perhaps its the tripple-letter suffix. I reply to paper cards when I get 'em (TNX for the SASEs) but never solicite cards anymore. (no flames, please) de Jerry/k6iii +++++++++++++++++++