November 02, 2013 11:31AM
No, the same cannot be said for eQSLs; it's an entirely different thing. To get an eQSL, the listener has to be sitting at the radio listening, write an ereport, and press Send. Pretty much the same as sending a report thru the mail. eQSLs are as valid as snail-mail QSLs in my book. Just faster. I have no problem with that.

My point is that "SDR catches" do not require any human intervention; the SDR does all the work. To ask for a QSL (of any sort) for these catches seems to be cheating, at least to me - the listener was asleep, or at work, or whatever, and did NOT actually hear the broadcast. How can someone who did NOT hear the broadcast feel good about receiving a QSL for it?

BTW, I have nothing against SDRs, either; they certainly have their place. The old WinRadio I have seems to have great ears, even compared to my R-75. It's the very late reports that seem useless, and acquiring QSLs for those non-receptions that bothers me.

Life should be enjoyed, not endured.
Subject Author Views Posted

Questionable practice..?

jtart 817 November 02, 2013 09:12AM

Re: Questionable practice..?

Pat Murphy 523 November 02, 2013 09:23AM

Re: Questionable practice..?

jtart 518 November 02, 2013 11:31AM

Re: Questionable practice..?

Pat Murphy 479 November 02, 2013 01:36PM

Re: Questionable practice..?

BramStoker 547 November 02, 2013 12:32PM

Re: Questionable practice..?

jtart 563 November 02, 2013 01:28PM

Re: Questionable practice..?

Lee 571 November 05, 2013 07:53AM

Re: Questionable practice..?

jtart 472 November 05, 2013 12:22PM

Re: Questionable practice..?

Pat Murphy 477 November 05, 2013 12:36PM

Re: Questionable practice..?

Lee 581 November 06, 2013 12:09PM

Re: Questionable practice..?

ThaDood 484 November 05, 2013 02:27PM

Re: Questionable practice..?

Bill F 429 November 12, 2013 10:18PM

Re: Questionable practice..?

ff 514 November 17, 2013 12:10PM



Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Click here to login