Email Detail
Show an email
GET /hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/LD7TU6J4YUROUJ4RJUOWK64MCHHWRTYY/
{ "url": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/email/LD7TU6J4YUROUJ4RJUOWK64MCHHWRTYY/", "mailinglist": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/", "message_id": "[email protected]", "message_id_hash": "LD7TU6J4YUROUJ4RJUOWK64MCHHWRTYY", "thread": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/list/[email protected]/thread/LD7TU6J4YUROUJ4RJUOWK64MCHHWRTYY/", "sender": { "address": "yet.another.squid (a) gmail.com", "mailman_id": "dc8989d0da2f4f548a3d493e624468f9", "emails": "https://mailman.amsat.org/hyperkitty/api/sender/dc8989d0da2f4f548a3d493e624468f9/emails/" }, "sender_name": "Darin Cowan", "subject": "[amsat-bb] QSL Etiquette", "date": "2009-03-13T12:33:47Z", "parent": null, "children": [], "votes": { "likes": 0, "dislikes": 0, "status": "neutral" }, "content": "If you didn't log the QSO, then reject the eQSL with a note that says \"not\nin my log\"... That's what I do.\n\nIt happens sometimes when condx are marginal, like you're describing. It's\nprobably a bit disappointing for\nthe person at the other end, but sometimes that's just the way things work.\nI'd rather keep my logs\nrelatively accurate.\n\nWhether or not the request is truly bogus is sometimes hard to judge. Did\nthe person make this up, or did\nhe mis-copy the callsign: maybe he had a QSO with VE3OIG and wrote J in his\nlog by mistake? Or because I \nmostly work digital modes, maybe noise munged the call a bit on his end and\nhe didn't notice. Don't chalk up\nto malice what can be easily explained by error or incompetence :) For\nsatellite contacts, a person like me\nwho has less-than-perfectly-functional hearing may misinterpret an E for an\nA, an F for an S, an M for an N \nand so on. This is exascerbated when people don't use proper phonetics, so\nit happens that I mis-copy \ncallsigns far too often for me to be happy with. I've had QSLs sent back\nfrom people who didn't know what\nthe card was for simply because It went to KW#XXX instead of KD#XXX or\nDE#YYY instead of DA#YYY. And that's\nnot calls I think are questionable... those are honest errors where I'm\nconvinced I got it right.\n\nIf conditions are marginal and I'm not truly sure, I tend not to QSL and\nwill leave a sticky note on my \ndesk for about a month. If I get a QSL with information matching a note, I\ngive the benefit of the doubt.\nOtherwise, I periodically clean up the notes and then the information is\nforever gone as if it never\nhappened.\n\nI've only ever received a handful of truly bogus QSLs, and they've all been\nSWL. In each case, the sender\nclearly read spots I put on the DX cluster and sent me a QSL as if he heard\nme in a QSO with the station\nI spotted. Those go straight into the shredder without comment. Now I\nreject SWL QSLs for anything that \nshows up on a cluster, even if it is valid.\n\n73 de VE3OIJ\n-Darin\n\n-----Original Message-----\nFrom: \"Ian\" <[email protected]>\nSubject: [amsat-bb] QSL Etiquette\nMessage-ID: <E06287B5F4054BFC8818E16E99D2FDF0@ian57229053685>\n\nI was wondering what others may be doing when they receive an \n\"questionnable\" request for a QSL. Last week while on vacation in Orlando I \nattempted to make some AO51 contacts with a handheld station. Althought I \nwas receiving many stations, I was unsuccesful in establishing a contact and\n\nnever heard anyone call me back. I must have been getting out though as I \nhave received an eQSL request from a South American station. Is it normal \npractice to ignore the request or to reply with refusal to QSL. If it were a\n\nmistaken callsign situation I would reply with a \"sorry\" but in the case of \na bogus request I was wondering what others may be doing.\nNext time I will use a better antenna hi hi.\nThanks & 73\nIan VE9IM\n \n\n\n\n\n", "attachments": [] }