Re: [DX-CHAT] QSL METHODS
why DX does not use lbotw... re: The same reason most others don't (see current EHAM survey) people don't like them and would rather have paper cards. John K5MO -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.3/423 - Release Date: 8/18/2006 Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
RE: [DX-CHAT] QSL METHODS
The confirmed perecentage for Logbook of the World will go up in time, as more amateurs use it. There is a perception that signing up for LotW is extremely difficult, and certain parties berate everyone on this score. (I think the biggest complaint is that signing up for LotW is considered, right or wrong, to be more difficult than getting on-line access to your bank or credit card accounts. Which I think says more about the lack of security on too many banking and credit systems, but that's another story). While the sign-up procedure could be streamlined, I never found it onerous. Many DX stations complain that they dislike having to send the ARRL proof of license, something not required of US amateurs -- but that's because the US amateurs are listed in the ULS, and many overseas government licensing authorities don't maintain a system anywhere near as detailed or effective as the FCC ULS is. And, of course, some DX don't have access to the Internet, or even a computer system, both of which make LotW a moot point for them. (And yes, there are many volunteers to act as QSL managers for these stations, or to help them upload their logs, but that's getting off the main point). Funny thing is, many of these stations have AG status on the eQSL.cc system, which also requires sending in proof of license... makes you wonder, how come it's no problem when it's someone else's system, but a big problem when the system belongs to the ARRL? (And by funny coincidence, many of these complaining are firmly in the anti-ARRL camp, but I guess we're not supposed to notice that? Ooops, I'm digressing, there I go again...) The thing is, once you've signed up for LotW, you're done. You just have to renew the certificate periodically (currently every 3 years, I believe), all of which can be done electronically or on-line. Give it time. 73, ron w3wn -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of John MaikischSent: Thursday, August 24, 2006 8:42 PMTo: dx-chat@njdxa.orgSubject: [DX-CHAT] [dx-chat] QSL METHODS I was just sending out some DX QSL cards and did some quick calculations on percent return for my effort. Now these are my numbers and my opinion and certainly may not reflect the ham community in general. The terms I use are: PRICE = what it costs me to get a card USAGE = my uninformed guess at how many DXhams use this method TIME = how long it takes me to get a confirmation CONVENIENCE = how easy it is for me to use this method % QSO's CONFIRMED = how many of my total DX QSO's have been confirmed by this method By the way, I QSL 100% all DX QSO's. All by the Bureau and also LOTW. Direct only for those I deem important for some reason and I include SASE, postage and contribution when appropriate. The numbers are: LOTW - price= cheapest, usage = not many, time = fastest method, convenience = OK but could be better, % QSO's confirmed 10% BUREAU - price = reasonable, usage = most, time = years, convenience = easiest to use, % QSO's confirmed ~ 33% DIRECT - price = very expensive (but if you need the card?), usage = most DX will respond to a direct request, time = weeks to months but never years, convenience = a lot of work, % QSO's confirmed = I get return on 99% of cards I send out direct Maybe this is not worth the bandwidthIused but as N2ERN says I am just wasting a few electrons not some trees. I know that a lot of DX stations do not like LOTW for some reasons but it sure can makes my life easier. 73, John - K2AZ
RE: [DX-CHAT] QSL METHODS
At 09:19 PM 08/24/2006, Ron Notarius W3WN wrote: The confirmed perecentage for Logbook of the World will go up in time, as more amateurs use it. I'm actually surprised at my own numbers. As of tonight my LoTW hit rate is 14.82%, not including the last 5 QSOs I made today. I'd say the majority of the LoTW hits I get are post-contest in the major DX 'tests, but if I was relying on LoTW solely as a QSL method, I'd have at least mixed and SSB DXCC and probably 20m as well. From what Wayne Mills has been saying, a *major* re-write of the LoTW interface is in the works for 2006/2007 so it should become easier for all as time goes on. As of today, there are 20,338 certificates active in the system and 13,465 individual users, and that number increases every day. I am willing to bet that outside of first-world nations, the knowledge of LoTW's existence is cloudy at best. What would be nice is if each national society went on a major push for their own members to become participants (again, with streamlined procedures), and maybe have local portals written in the local languages. Look at it this way, I can say a callsign, greeting, five-nine, thank you and 73 in about 4 languages besides English, but if I needed to log into a site and fill out an application in Spanish, German, Japanese or Russian it just wouldn't happen, period. I see it from the point of view of the guy for whom English isn't a daily language in Estonia, Azerbaijan or Georgia (take your pick on that one) . Cheers, Peter, W2IRT
Re: [DX-CHAT] QSL METHODS
At 09:59 PM 08/24/2006, Charles Harpole wrote: Ron, ur answer does not address my list of reasons why DX does not use lbotw... re: No computer... that does it... end of story which u acknowledged, but -long upload times and expense... no answer Long upload times? Are you joking? Even on a 14.4 or 28.8 modem transfer times for an incremental LoTW file would be a few seconds to one minute. I'm looking here at my last 10 uploads. The smallest was 2KB, the largest was 39KB. After a contest or large run it MAY be 100k. Upload once a week and costs couldn't be more than a few pennies. Surely it takes longer for a heavily-graphics-laden Web page to load than it does to E-MAIL ONE ATTACHMENT UNDER 100KB! -difficulty of use... ur answer is just keep trying until u get it... not a good answer to busy guys who have no real stake in sending the data anyway Other than the language issue, it's NOT difficult to use in the slightest once you're set up. You log in with your callsign and password (most PC's will even remember them for you if you have cookies enabled), click UPLOAD FILE, browse for it and send it. If you want to do it by e-mail it's even easier. e-mail your log to [EMAIL PROTECTED] as an attachment. Big Whoop. -when ham radio, a hobby, is more secure than banks, ah, where have we gone? Who says banks are less secure than the League's certificate system? Your bank verifies your personal info up the wazoo when you open your account. You get checked and verified from here to kingdom come. When the bank is sure you're you, and you get an ATM card, you like that to your data and it's all encrypted behind the scenes. It's more STREAMLINED for the bank user because frankly they have millions of dollars to pay programmers to make it idiot-proof (or at least idiot-resistant). The bottom line is that your local bank branch makes you prove you're you, just as the ARRL, up front, demands the same proof. And if you can't afford to mail a photocopy of your license to the US, you seriously need to reconsider this hobby, IMHO! -using mail to register and reregister and reregister etc... ur mail works many do not. Charlie, what are you talking about? re-register? UYou send in your documents ONCE, then you re-new once every 3 years ONLINE. It takes 30 flippin' SECONDS to renew. -limited EnglishSURPRISE, ENGLISH IS NOT THE ONLY LANGUAGE IN THE WORLD. Yup, that's a problem for sure, and as I wrote in a previous post, that's maybe something the local societies could work with the league in improving. I think at the least, the League should support English, Spanish and maybe French and German. Leave Sindarin, Qenya, Esperanto and Klingon to 3rd-party developers. -dislike of ARRL... maybe a factor but there is also distaste for America abroad now... USA lost all of its good graces abroad soon after 9/11 due to its foreign policies... Am. squandered all the huge sympathy within months of 9/11 believe me, America is not beloved anymore outside its boundaries, and that attitude spills over into ham radio as well as every other activity in modern life sad. But I bet many of those same stations that have a distaste for the United States government's foreign policy will willingly take a stateside ham's dollar bills and send a paper card out upon request. I don't know about you, but when I work a station from a country that is known to generally dislike the US, I don't personally give a rat's right royal rump what the politics of the situation are. I greet every ham I talk to with a GA/GE on CW, or nice to work you on phone. I'm working a fellow ham radio operator not their country's minister of propaganda. *well, *probably not). I think dislike for the ARRL as an organisation is probably more concentrated in this country than it is in the rest of the world. Cheers, Peter, W2IRT Subscribe/unsubscribe, feedback, FAQ, problems http://njdxa.org/dx-chat To post a message, DX related items only, dx-chat@njdxa.org This is the DX-CHAT reflector sponsored by the NJDXA http://njdxa.org
