View Full Version : LoTW, eMAIL and snail mail - time to change!
Recently you may have noticed that CQ magazine is now accepting eQSL.cc cards for their awards. While many hams still find DXCC, WAC, WAS and the like from the ARRL to be the standard for routine awards, few DXers will quibble with the fact that working 5BWAZ is a *much* more difficult feat that 5BDXCC, for instance.
Part of the allure of electronic exchange of QSLs is not only the quickness one can obtain a confirmation, but the savings in REAL money by no longer requiring self-addressed envelopes with either stamps or IRCs. As a young ham some 30 years ago, I went to the post office to find *every* IRC they had had just been bought by a ham friend of mine across town! NO FAIR!!
Thus, I find it odd that while LoTW relies purely on electronic transmissions, the ARRL still requires foreign stations to SNAIL MAIL a copy of their license along with an accepted ID.
HUH??
As anyone knows, one can just as easily forge a document for snail mail as for email. It makes no sense.
Currently, my "hit" rate for LoTW is 25% and the VAST majority of my QSLs are DX. HOW much higher might that be if the ARRL would allow foreign stations to use EXACTLY the same electronic media to forward their documents to the ARRL as does LoTW itself uses??
Does a photocopy of an ID or license come with a "certificate" of guarantee?? Hardly. The ARRL will accept a photocopy of a passport via snail mail but NOT a scanned copy of the exact same document? HOW can you tell the difference? They will accept a scanned copy I print and put in an envelope but not via email??
:confused::confused::confused:
Come on ARRL!! It's time to do AWAY with this archaic requirement NOW!!
VE3FMC
01-15-2009, 10:59 AM
I agree. I was going to sign up for LoTW. I went through the first part of the sign up on line. Then came the part where I have to scan or photocopy my license. I thought ok, easy enough, just did that for EQSL.
So I thought I could just upload that scanned image,
NOT. Snail mail the copy in.
So that ended that process. Not that mailing a copy of it is a big issue. But mailing anything to do with a drivers license, or passport is. Forget that.
If my license is not good enough to show I am an Amateur, along with the data base information from QRZ, RAC etc then I really do not need LoTW.
Buro, direct or EQSL for me Thank You. I can live without the ARRL Awards.
And kvetching about it on QRZ will influence the ARRL how?
...which is not to say that you don't have a valid point; you do. So what are you going to do about it that actually has some input to the process?
And kvetching about it on QRZ will influence the ARRL how?
Uhm . . . grassroots organization!! :D
Currently, my "hit" rate for LoTW is 25% and the VAST majority of my QSLs are DX. HOW much higher might that be if the ARRL would allow foreign stations to use EXACTLY the same electronic media to forward their documents to the ARRL as does LoTW itself uses??
Probably not by much. Foreign stations are unlikely to give up paper QSLing, and some deliberately do not sign up for electronic QSLing in any form because they love getting Green $tamps.
When living in 9Y, at TT$6.30 to US$1 exchange rate I knew I loved getting US dollars in the mail, especially since my postage costs were less than $2, less than $1 in fact. I didn't say how much to send, but most stations sent $2. A few sent IRCs, which I tried to exchange at the post office but only got surface mail postage, so their QSLs went via snail mail. Some I sent via the bureau when the post office refused the IRCs.
Others without return postage went in the trash, because let's face it, I was not rich and the last thing I needed was another "W" card.
ARRL have spent too much time and money coming up with their own version of eQSL (as usual a day late and a dollar short) to ever accept eQSL for award credit. It would negate the need for LoTW.
KA3JLW
01-16-2009, 12:08 AM
ARRL have spent too much time and money coming up with their own version of eQSL (as usual a day late and a dollar short) to ever accept eQSL for award credit. It would negate the need for LoTW.
True.
Fix #1:
But LotW could allow confirmed contacts to "port over" to eQSL to print out a QSL - if desired. eQSLs themselves would still not be allowed for awards, but if the op wanted some wallpaper, eQSL could provide the picture/card from the LotW data. The DXpeditions/contest stations would still save the money/time/effort while the paper collectors would get their fix.
Fix #2:
eQSL should allow better quality pictures and better editing options, or simply allow 3rd parties to create high resolution designs. I don't expect eQSL will ever rival a very well done, professionally printed paper QSL - but it should not look so "16 bit" either. Bandwidth and memory are too cheap.
Fix #2:
eQSL should allow better quality pictures and better editing options, or simply allow 3rd parties to create high resolution designs. I don't expect eQSL will ever rival a very well done, professionally printed paper QSL - but it should not look so "16 bit" either. Bandwidth and memory are too cheap.
You can upload a card you designed elsewhere if you like. That's what I did.
..........Bob
K8YZK
01-16-2009, 01:40 PM
Probably not by much. Foreign stations are unlikely to give up paper QSLing, and some deliberately do not sign up for electronic QSLing in any form because they love getting Green $tamps.
I think you hit it on the head, with the Green Stamps. I never sent any money to another ham to get a QSL because most of the time, the other station had a better setup then I did, and if he can afford that, then he can afford to send a QSL without help from me. Maybe they should have sent me the Green Stamp.
I do think it is time for the ARRL to move forward with some of it's requirement, but I also think they want to be special (can we say in control) so they don't. I have a LoTW account but very seldom use it, eQSL is ok, but now days I know who I work and don't really need the wall paper or QSL to say so.
W6ONV
01-16-2009, 03:06 PM
Since the start of my experience on HF I have used paper QSL, LotW and eQSL for ALL contacts. I am sure the novelty of QSLing will wear off, but until it does I would like to go to my mailbox and see where that next QSL card is from. That is part of the hobby for me.
As of yet, I have not sent any cards out of the country, including Mexico or Canada. Some of those DX stations I have QSOed with have already confirmed the QSO in LotW or eQSL, which would make my sending via USPS pointless. Yet I will still send the card, not because the receiving stations wants "another W6" but because I want that DX station. That station will also get IRCs or green stamps.
I think it is a great move on the part of CQ to accept eQSL. I do think it sets a new precedent in QSLing for awards (if you chase paper). It will be curious in the coming months to see what ARRL decides to do, if anything.
I created my own eQSL design using a similar design I have on my QSL card using Photoshop. I would like to see eQSL improve their online eQSL creation tools and who knows maybe they will with the CQ announcement.
KA3JLW
01-16-2009, 04:11 PM
You can upload a card you designed elsewhere if you like. That's what I did.
..........Bob
Agreed and I have done that myself.
The issue is that it comes out the other side in fairly low quality. That's subjective of course, but my eye can distinguish an eQSL from a regular QSL just by the low quality of the graphics. It doesn't have to be that way - and some of the graphics could be really nice if allowed to go through in higher resolution.
The 3rd party comes in as they could host the image if eQSL didn't have the bandwidth - in addition to design services. Just a thought there, eQSL could do it as well.
KA3JLW
01-16-2009, 04:11 PM
and BTW, I'm not losing sleep over this. Just some ideas to make it better.
Agreed and I have done that myself.
The issue is that it comes out the other side in fairly low quality. That's subjective of course, but my eye can distinguish an eQSL from a regular QSL just by the low quality of the graphics.
I think maybe something else is going on. I have some received eQSL's I've printed out on my photo-printer and some of the graphics are very good quality, just like a good photograph. I note that some others are not after looking a bit closer.
So dunno.
...........Bob
