[Dx-qsl] Remote station time-share for only 30ドル/mo!

Tue Jan 27 14:44:33 EST 2015

 > - Effectively, OQRS is the "QSL manager"
Not so! OQRS is the "postal service". There is still a human QSL
Manager on the other end to whom the OQRS requests are routed and
that QSL manager is still responsible for checking the log, certifying
the QSO information is accurate and mailing a card or uploading the
data *in a secure form that can not be tampered with* and in a
verifiable manner.
There is a major difference between a cryptographically protected
digital record and the equivalent of a "QSL card" that you can create
with PAINT on your own computer. LotW provides a cryptographically
protected record from end to end, eQSL.cc is an on-line Paint program.
73,
 ... Joe, W4TV
On 2015年01月27日 1:36 PM, dx-qsl-request at mailman.qth.net wrote:
> Date: 2015年1月27日 12:36:04 -0600
> From: Michael Carper<mike at wa9pie.net>
> To: dx-qsl<dx-qsl at mailman.qth.net>
> Subject: Re: [Dx-qsl] Remote station time-share for only 30ドル/mo!
> Message-ID:
> 	<CAKJep-AXj5FpX_Wo2t332vojeJvrHp63ONxgBai_RxM3Yh9EjQ at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>> Yeah, I know folks are sick of the topic. But for clarity, I was
> suggesting that I (or anyone) could start a new DXCC "account" with a
> foreign callsign in a very desirable DX location and do quite well. Some
> of the awards tend to favor Europe anyway.
>> Regarding the fact that eQSL (AG) is not accepted for DXCC credit, consider
> this...
>> - You work EP6T...
> - You upload it to Clublog... where there's no digital certificate and no
> AG verification
> - Effectively, OQRS is the "QSL manager"
> - You wire funds through OQRS to obtain (buy) a QSL card
> - The ARRL accepts it for DXCC credit
>> ...by comparison... why not...
>> - You work EP6T
> - You upload it to eQSL... which has AG verification
> - Effectively, eQSL is the "QSL Manager"
> - You go into your eQSL account... print out the QSL card (with AG
> verificaiton)
> - The ARRL refuses to accept it for DXCC credit because it was "obtained
> electronically"
>> SO...
>> What's the difference? I've never been able to figure it out.
>> Mike, WA9PIE
>