> Please, do not misunderstand Dave. I recognize > and laud your historic QSO. > > > My caution was about revealing the details of > the QSO because of the recent ARRL prohibition. >
I think we have to be careful not to _create_ a problem where none may exist. While I always applaud prudence (and, this is surely that), I would also suggest, that the ARRL prohibitions that trigger all this, officially at least, apply only to QSOs under the DXCC program. That is (at least today) explicitly where the League has this discussion. If the QSO would only be turned in for, say, WAS, I don't think (yet) it is a problem. I could be wrong, but if I was one of these ops, I'd surely send in the card in good faith and see. Again, I am not an expert at VHF, but I seem to recall reading many a _published claim_ (that is, articles in magazines) that contain exactly the kinds of data we're suddenly worried about. The League's concern is primarily with _busted calls_ being turned into QSOs (the ARRL's DXCC blog commentary on the recent accreditation change makes that explicit). I don't think there's much danger, by contrast, in having W5UN receiving a QSL card from W9VB and puzzling over whether or not he should allow the QSO, and send the card, maybe eventually to _two_ people. This is a problem on DXpeditions where the DX station (at their discretion) may choose to ignore a "one element" logging error and like things to permit a QSO and a QSL. I've been on the receiving end of a DX pileup and it would be easy to decide in the noise and confusion that a one element CW error (almost certainly mislogged on my part) still deserves a card. No doubt some DX operators do allow this sort of thing, some don't. The problem is, DXCC miscreants, if they had full logging info available, would be expected to try and abuse this kindness, by scanning the full info log for a "near call sign" in hopes of snagging a rare one. Thus, the League action. I don't see this as an issue for the typical VHF QSO, because in the vast majority of cases, certainly in cases involving setting distance records, the operators know who the heck they are going to talk to to start with. The League, surely, knows all of what I know and much more. I've found dealing with them on awards questions immensely sensible over time. The whole "busted calls become fake QSOs" issue simply isn't germane here. I suggest we be careful not to _create_ problems, until the League, in its wisdom, decides they exist. It is probably best not to publish all that stuff, but at least "today" I don't think we should worry too much about doing so. Larry WO0Z _______________________________________________ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com
