Confirmation process VERY prohibitive for me. How about you?

Discussion in 'Logbook User Forum' started by KK6QMS, Feb 15, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: FBNews-1
ad: OK1UUad-1
ad: Left-3
ad: Subscribe
ad: L-MFJ
ad: Left-2
  1. KK6QMS

    KK6QMS XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    I started a support case because I have had many rejections and today tried to confirm a QSO with a new ham and could not.

    It comes down to 2 things:
    1- The restrictive nature of what it requires (does not support repeater systems or VoIP systems where freq/band could be different for each operator)
    2- The inability to even expend the extra effort to find the details of the QSO so you can just match them. The freq/time/etc is not shown for the other operator.

    I started a support case with the following:

    "Confirmations are VERY frustrating. I have had MANY rejects because the details could not be seen and matched or a VoIP system was employed so the RF freq used on each side was different etc. I just made a contact with a young kid and he wants to confirm our contact and add to his QRZ log book. I am finding the process prohibitive and causes me to avoid using the log book. "

    and got the unhelpful reply (along with having the case closed in my face essentially):
    "QSOs are confirmed when both parties have identical details logged in their QRZ logbooks for date/time (within 30 minutes, UTC time zone), mode, and band. If you are having trouble confirming a QSO, I would recommend emailing or sending a private message to the other party to make sure that you both logged the same details. Thanks for using QRZ. "

    In any event, with no support to simply allow 2 people to agree they had a QSO I become disinterested in utilizing it or becoming a member.

    The logbook needs to support less detail for a QSO and also support systems where each operator is on a different frequency or system. If it has to do something with "contests" or whatever then maybe an option to have an "unofficial" QSO that would not be "contest" approved.

    I WANT to use the logbook but in the present form will have to reluctantly look elsewhere.

  2. KA0AAM

    KA0AAM Ham Member QRZ Page

    I 10000000 percent agree with you. . .

    I run boat anchors here. . . the only thing I have is a Guestimate of a frequency of +/- 10kc, And I do not have any kind of time that I keep track of. . . .I could care a less what time I talk to them, and if I log in a time, it is a guestimate of plus or minus a few hours. the only thing I keep track of, is the Day on MY time which is CST.

    end result? I can no longer help people get their QSL verified. . .I have given up. . .I am tired of wasting my time on a QSL logging page, guessing what time, what frequency, or sometimes what day, because the difference between UTC and CST may make. . . .

    Sorry guys and gals... .I have given up. . . because I am fed up with the ¨new¨ logging program they have. . .
  3. K2JMC

    K2JMC Ham Member QRZ Page

    I Agree with you both, John
  4. WX7P

    WX7P Ham Member QRZ Page

    Are you guys serious?

    Repeater contacts?
    VoIP contacts?

    Who confirms those?

    How much trouble is it to have a clock by your station? Doesn't anyone keep a paper log any more? Or even one on a computer?


  5. K3LI

    K3LI Ham Member QRZ Page

    WX7P, a contact is a contact. If you use any method legally available under FFC rules, then it is a legal contact. IF we listen to you, then no other form of contact other than direct voice can count. No RTTY, PSK, CW, nothing. If you dont talk to them, you cant log them.

    Sorry, if its a legal method allowed by the FCC, and you are licensed to use the frequency you are on, it should be confirmed. The amateur community, for the most part are decent honest people. If they say the communicated on X day at X time, then its confirmed in my mind. If you say you talked to me on 14.300 using VOIP, and I say I talked with you on 14.227 or what ever, just because some arbitrary rule by some unknown should not discount the logging.

    Yea sure, there is some not so honest people out there, but very few I have seen in this community. Hmm, If i talk to you and have to use my clarifier and move 240 hertz up or down, why is that allow, technically in the absolute, we are not on the same frequency so you cant log that?

    Suppose you log 5 DX contacts today, and you accidentally enter the time as 14:00 gmt and its was actually 13:00 gmt, you dont get those to count?

    I agree with the others, most of the time its hard enough to get a contact using some other log system to log here and verify your contact.
    Again, any legal method used by two hams do communicate should be counted. Failure to do so in my mind is the same as QRZ saying "we dont trust what you say" "maybe your just trying to fatten up your log for an award". Translate that to "we think your not telling the truth here"
  6. KC2UGV

    KC2UGV Ham Member QRZ Page

    Sounds like some folk need to install a frequency counter and a clock in their radio room...
  7. K3XR

    K3XR Ham Member QRZ Page

    And since the FCC has not had a requirement to keep a log for some time not all stations maintain one and therefore all bets are off and no frequency counter or clock needed.
  8. KA0AAM

    KA0AAM Ham Member QRZ Page

    Some of us are not appliance operators like some hams. . . Freq counter? waste of my time and money. I have a 100kc calibrator, and use it rarely. . .
    Clock? who gives a damn. . .going to run daylight savings time? No? UTC time? CST?. . .

    I made the contact, Got a RST, Got callsign, even got location. . . The rest of the 30 min conversation is about radio's and whatever.
  9. KC2UGV

    KC2UGV Ham Member QRZ Page

    Frequency counters are helpful in determining if you are in band or not... Just saying. Clocks are useful for other things than logs, like determining you've spent your entire day in the shack, and have ignored your family for the past 13 hours...

    Appliance operators only use freq counters? Lol. Operators who like to make sure they are in band do as well. Just saying.
  10. KC2UGV

    KC2UGV Ham Member QRZ Page

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page