eQSL vs LOTW

Discussion in 'Logbooks & Logging Programs' started by Guest, Apr 29, 2006.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: L-Geochron
ad: Left-2
ad: L-MFJ
ad: HRDLLC-2
ad: abrind-2
ad: Left-3
  1. Guest

    Guest Guest

    Thanks. I added them up.

    There are 8,396 USA users and 9,982 from everywhere else, for a total of 18,328. So it's about 50% more than LOTW.

    By the way, comparing the eQSL versus LOTW QSLs I have recieved, it looks like at least half of the LOTW users are also eQSL users.
     
  2. WA3KYY

    WA3KYY Ham Member QRZ Page

    Since everyone is doing it:

    LoTW:
    Today is Mon, 1 May 2006 UTC
    You are WA3KYY
    You have 12,337 QSO records
    You have 2,385 QSL records

    eQSL:
    11,712 QSO records
    2,396 eQSL records


    I have 109 DXCC entities confirmed via LoTW and 77 via eQSL, WAS in both.

    73,
    Mike WA3KYY
     
  3. WA3KYY

    WA3KYY Ham Member QRZ Page

    This is precisely why LoTW operates the way it does. It is impossible to use LoTW to find busted calls or QSOs.

    Some contesters love eQSL. They upload logs immediately after a contest and hope others do the same. Then they check for eQSLs that do not match their upload to see if they have a busted call. They then correct their logs before submitting to the contest sponsor. That violates the rule that all information must be received correctly during the contest QSO to count.

    73,
    Mike WA3KYY
     
  4. K9STH

    K9STH Ham Member QRZ Page

    VO:

    In LOTW all QSOs are still posted, be they legitimate or not. If a corresponding QSO is uploaded by the "other" station then it becomes "verified". Otherwise the QSO remains in "limbo". There is nothing in LOTW that indicates a QSO as being "bogus". Frankly, many of the QSOs uploaded will never be "verified" for the simple reason that the "other" station has never uploaded and will never upload his/her log.

    All that LOTW does is to automatically check your log to see if the QSO is in it. It does not permanently brand a QSO as being "bogus" because it is NOT in your log. It is certainly possible for someone to "update" their log and the "unverified" QSO will suddenly become "verified".

    What eQSL doesn't do is to automatically verify the QSO if you have uploaded your log to the system (at least I don't believe that it does). However, if, like me, you do not upload your log it is still possible to retrieve your verifications without any problems. You do have to manually verify your QSOs in eQSL but that is done automatically in LOTW if you upload your log. If you do not upload your log then there is no verification by the ARRL and those contacts made with stations who do upload their logs will remain in "limbo" basically forever.

    There are going to be "busted calls" showing up in many logs that are uploaded to both eQSL and LOTW. There may be a number of QSOs that are just plain false in logs that are uploaded to both eQSL and LOTW. There is nothing in the software of either system which can tell which calls are "busted" and which calls are fraudulant. The primary difference in the systems is that the ARRL's system cross-checks with other logs to see if the QSO is present and eQSL does not, at least that I am aware.

    Frankly, the manual verification required by eQSL is exactly the same as an amateur radio operator having to physically verify that the contact did take place by looking in his/her written or computer logbook. If a QSL card is received that doesn't correspond with an actual QSO then it does not represent a valid QSO and can either be thrown in "File 13" or returned to the sender. This has been happening for almost a century and just because LOTW does this automatically when both logs are available verifying is nothing new.

    The primary difference between the two systems is that, like in many cases before, the ARRL has "discovered" something and makes out like it was their original idea although other systems have been in place before the ARRL's "discovery". The ARRL has chosen to only accept QSOs that are submitted through their LOTW system for their awards. That is most certainly their right. But, to say that their system is the only one that can be trusted is another matter. The information uploaded is the determining factor and neither the ARRL nor eQSL has any real control over the accuracy of the individual data submitted. If the data is correct it is correct. If the data is flawed then it is flawed. If someone is trying to "pull the wool over someone's eyes" then that can happen as well and equally as well in both LOTW and eQSL.

    I have no connection with eQSL except that I check the site every few weeks to see if I have any QSLs. If so, then I print them out on Bristol board (I have a lot around) printing one on each side at opposite ends. Then, when I get around to it, I do cut them out and put them in a physical file which is separate from my "normal" (through the mail or through the bureau) QSLs. I started doing this when several stations that I worked during contests at times when most amateur's say that it is impossible to do so on the particular band started QSLing via eQSL. Showing someone an eQSL card definitely means more to them than just showing a log entry.

    I know that there are people who believe that the ARRL is "perfect". I know that there are people who believe the ARRL cannot do anything correctly. As for me, I recognize the things that the ARRL is doing wrong and I recognize the things that the ARRL is doing correctly. It is just my opinion that the ARRL is doing, and has done, more things that have affected amateur radio in a negative way and thus have not been a member since the late 1970s. Other amateur radio operators feel just the opposite and that is most certainly their right.

    Glen, K9STH
     
  5. WA3KYY

    WA3KYY Ham Member QRZ Page

    Glen,

    A couple of points. With eQSL if you upload your log then matching QSOs in your Inbox and that of the other station show up without the green check or red X buttons. You must still click individual records or click the button selecting all matching QSOs to move them to your Archive.

    Unlike eQSL, in LoTW you never see who has uploaded a QSO for you unless a match is found in the log you have uploaded. Thus you cannot use LoTW to find busted QSOs and correct them like you can with eQSL. This may or may not be a good thing. For contests it is good but for other QSOs perhaps not.

    I bet well all have the experience of receiving a QSL for a call not in the log but when we check, we find we made a silly mistake. No doubt we all, or a good percent of us, correct the log and send out the reply card. There is also the opposite of when the other station gets our call slightly wrong but the rest of the info matches so they correct their logs and send a reply card back. I sure am glad when a DX station I need acknowleges they made a mistake and QSLs the contact. Since we cannot tell what they actually record in the log even if we hear them repeat our call correctly, it is nice to be able to check in this manner.

    73,
    Mike WA3KYY
     
  6. KJ3N

    KJ3N Ham Member QRZ Page

    Haven't you old women kvetched enough about this subject already?

    Seems we go through this cycle where we have to bash eQSL very so often. Are we not feeling good about ourselves again? Feeling the need to be "superior"? Hmm? [​IMG]

    Use what you like. Don't use what you don't like.

    Use them both. Don't use either.

    Just don't try to make LoTW sound like some holder of "The One True Faith". (where's my barf bag?)

    Hell, I'm surprised we haven't heard from the "True Believers" who only use paper.

    What a bunch of sanctimonious (and useless) BS....
     
  7. KC9ECI

    KC9ECI Ham Member QRZ Page

    Now who could be causing this? Who could it be? Let me think. Could it be? Could it? Could it be...SATAN?!

    Well now, isn't that special!
     
  8. K9STH

    K9STH Ham Member QRZ Page

    KYY:

    Since my primary log is on paper and not on the computer I do not upload my log to eQSL. That is why I was not aware of the "cross check" that eQSL can do as well as LOTW.

    Even though I do keep my contest contacts on the computer for the simple reason that keeping the "dupe" sheet has gotten to be a real "pain in the posterior" these days, I print off the log at the end of the contest and keep that as part of my paper log. If I don't make very many contacts in the contest I just manually enter the information into the log.

    The computer in my main shack is not connected to the Internet. Therefore, to upload any of the contest logs to either LOTW or eQSL I would have to do the conversion on the shack computer, transfer the log to a floppy, bring the floppy to my office, then upload from the office computer which has a cable Internet connection. As such, if I get an eQSL that checks with my log I just "click" on the correct spot and verify the QSO. Otherwise, I don't do anything.

    Glen, K9STH
     
  9. LB1UE

    LB1UE Ham Member QRZ Page

    The only thing I've found peculiar about eQSL is a Canadian station coming up as Central Africa. During the last year, I've uploaded about 600 QSOs and only received one bogus.

    I would like to be member of LOTW as well, but I forget to scan and snail mail my license every time I decide to do so.
    As for the DXCC, I couldn't care less. I use eQSL to quickly confirm the QSO, as well as sending papercards to the ones that want a card or to the ones I want a QSL card from.

    It's like stamps. You can either collect stamps or images of stamps. [​IMG]
     
  10. WA3KYY

    WA3KYY Ham Member QRZ Page

    Well Glen if by office you mean a home office then slap a WiFi router on that internet connection and stick a WiFi card in your shack computer [​IMG]

    Not only will you be able to easily upload logs to eQSL and LoTW, you can moderate QRZ while ragchewing on 20M or working JAs at noon on 40M [​IMG]

    73,
    Mike WA3KYY
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page