Re: [IRCA] Poor Excuses kill this hobby

["Les Rayburn" <les@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

To my knowledge, very few tests that have been coordinated over the past few 
years have had any issues with QSL's. Some have taken a long time to be 
received, and in one
case there was a change of ownership after the test, which resulted in the 
station manager having to find a new job before QSL's could be issued. 
Otherwise, QSL's have been received.

Some objected to receiving QSL's from the Test Coordinator or anyone else 
other than the station directly. But in almost every case, QSL's have been 
received. I have a few Postal QSL requests from a test ran earlier this year 
still sitting on my test, waiting for me to find time to review the 
cassettes. But that will happen and QSL's will be shipped out before year's 
end. The delay is regrettable, but in fairness to all, we asked for MP3 
files and e-mails, postal and cassettes were a secondary choice. At least 
two of the cassette recordings contain over an hours worth of material that 
I'm supposed to find time to listen to, and dig out the DX test.

Frankly, Konnie, I think your attitude is a poor one. There is no comparison 
between ham radio DXing and MW DXing as it pertains to QSL's. The stations 
are not in the "hobby" business, they're in the making money business. Any 
test, QSL, or other extra effort on their part is a gift and should be 
treated as such. If you want "verification" make a recording and keep it. 
That proves your reception much more than any piece of paper.

We all like to receive QSL's, and I understand that for some, they're a big 
part of the hobby. But the attitude shift that is needed is on the part of 
the DX'ers, not the broadcasters.

I think Jim and the new BTC are doing a bang up job. So far, I've promptly 
received QSL's for two tests that I've received this fall. And I've got some 
new stations in the log. My hat is off to them.

73,

Les Rayburn, N1LF





Les Rayburn, director
High Noon Film
100 Centerview Drive Suite 111
Birmingham, AL 35216
205.824.8930
205.824.8960 fax
205.253.4867 cell


--------------------------------------------------
From: "Konnie Rychalsky" <dxbox87@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 10:40 PM
To: "Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America" 
<irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: [IRCA] Poor Excuses kill this hobby

>
> Jim,
>
> With all due respect, you are a ham radio operator, and the reference at 
> the bottom of your recent post ( QRZ.com ) does an excellent job at 
> "defining" what a QSL is, unless you have redefined it.  I in no way 
> suggested that you insist upon the testing-station that you educate them, 
> but come on now.... you "ARE" a ham radio operator.... and wouldn't it 
> help to a) when you ask a station to run a test, ask them if they have a 
> QSL available, b) if not, offer one, and c) it would be nice to let us 
> know?????  Ham radio operators know what QSLs are, and no news to you I'm 
> sure.  Aren't you of all people suppossed to encourage the hobby of radio? 
> Doesn't Ham radio include QSLs???
>
> To everyone on this list, are you implying that even if you do coordinate 
> a DX test, it's possible a QSL will not be issued?  If indeed possible, 
> isn't it worth asking?  Most QSLs I receive from stations are from those 
> who were or currently are Ham radio operators.  I will remain gratefull 
> with a "QSL."  I include a friendly letter with my reports showing 
> examples of QSLs, even on an idea for a quick make-shift QSL if the 
> station doesn't have one [and I'll add I've received phonecalls in return 
> stating they were interested.]  Maybe if you'll ask, you'll be surprised 
> on the answer, and therefore help the station and the hobby.  The reason 
> for hearing a distant station is to have your reception confirmed, as 
> proof, and that is done via a QSL card.  Somehow, coordinating a test and 
> not checking into a QSL response just falls short to the "hobby" that 
> began long before you or I were even born.  To settle for less, doesn't 
> help the hobby.  Personally, anything less is just that, something less.
>
> I believe your response has lead me to question if it is worth staying up, 
> or getting up, to listen to a test anymore.  Who's suppossed to share the 
> DX & QSL with the station, if the test coordinator doesn't?  Don't you 
> think that if a station will not issue a QSL, we should know that ahead of 
> time?  I cannot find your explanation to ask, or educate, adequatly helps 
> the hobby.
>
> A fish is a fish, a worm is a worm, and a QSL is a QSL.  As for "these 
> days" one of the problems of receiving less than a QSL just may be found 
> in your response.  Maybe instead of a stamp, each DXer can send in a 
> dollar, and with the $10 - $20, you can supply the station with a 
> gift...uh, QSL cards!!!!!! about 100 worth.  You will have left the hobby 
> a better place than you found it.
>
> Then, dxers will be gratefull to you and the IRCA for making a difference. 
> What is the IRCA for anyway?  And coming from a Ham radio operator 
> ????????????
>
> God, that was simple.  People, stop settling for less, and poor excuses. 
> Get involved in your hobby!  Stop looking for what you can get, and add 
> selfishly to a raggetty old shoe box full of mold and mildew stuck in a 
> closet that won't see light for another ten years... and starting looking 
> on how to give to others, including an education on what a QSL really is, 
> and supply them.  There needs to be a serious attitude shift here.  That 
> should start the keyboards clicking, eh?
>
> Konnie
> SW CT
>> From: KH2AR@xxxxxxxxxxx> To: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 22 Nov 
>> 2007 21:31:09 -0600> Subject: Re: [IRCA] QSL from WIGG 1420 for DX TEST> 
>>  > Folks, I gotta say, any time you get a response from a station these 
>> days> and the "intent" is to verify your reception, you need to be 
>> grateful. I am> certain that this was the intent by WIGG. The days of 
>> insisting upon a full> data verification with date, time, frequency, 
>> power, etc., and an> unambiguous "your reception is verified" statement 
>> or the like are gone. In> a word, no, not all stations are aware of what 
>> constitutes what we DXers> would categorize as a full data QSL. And I'm 
>> not about to try and launch an> education program. Again, we are lucky to 
>> get the test and a snail-mail> response to our reception reports at all.> 
>>  > Jim Pogue KH2AR/WPE9HLJ/KG6DX1A> Memphis, Tennessee USA> > NRD-535, 
>> R-390A, ICF-2010> Wellbrook LA5030 loop, PAØRDT mini-whip,> attic 
>> longwire, Quantum phaser> > QRZ.com/KH2AR> > -----Original Message-----> 
>> From: irca-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
>> [mailto:irca-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]> On Behalf Of Konnie Rychalsky> 
>> Sent: Thursday, November 22, 2007 7:45 PM> To: Mailing list for the 
>> International Radio Club of America> Subject: Re: [IRCA] QSL from WIGG 
>> 1420 for DX TEST> > > I thought the definition of a "QSL" confirms a 
>> date? Isn't this instead a> "Verie?" On another note, aren't the stations 
>> that run these DX tests aware> of "QSL" response?> > Konnie> SW CT> > > 
>> Yesterday received a hand written letter with business card from WIGG> > 
>> 1420khz for DX Test on Nov 4th., signed by Paul Turner. No date was> > 
>> mentioned.
> _________________________________________________________________
> Put your friends on the big screen with Windows Vista® + Windows Live™.
> http://www.microsoft.com/windows/shop/specialoffers.mspx?ocid=TXT_TAGLM_CPC_MediaCtr_bigscreen_102007
> _______________________________________________
> IRCA mailing list
> IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca
>
> Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the 
> original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the 
> IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers
>
> For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org
>
> To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> 

_______________________________________________
IRCA mailing list
IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca

Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers

For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org

To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx