It's not just that: ARRL already has LoTW. Why would it even consider another, different, parallel, PKI approach unless there are significant advantages to more than offset the costs (including

On the other hand, with the likely low usage this would have and the significant development effort it would take, I doubt this will happen. Outlook LT Gil W0MN Hierro Candente Batir de

Throwing a donation to a planned expedition ahead of time does not bother me in the least. Their expenses are upfront, not after the expedition. If the expedition does not materialize, or is disabled

None of the emailed cards I’ve received have had digital signatures. But if they did, I would support them being accepted. + An email message digitally-signed with the sender's LOTW "Callsign

Some are now charging for LOTW confirmations. It’s not about postage anymore. That said if you want to play then you have to pay. No real way around it. I have donated to DXpeditions including

It's not as prevalent as it use to be but you are correct on getting a few $ for a card. I agree that if YOU want a card, paying for postage is reasonable but with all the on line options for

Pete; I have not followed this thread very closely, so this may have already been said. If all he wants is an inexpensive piece of paper, use eQSL, it is free, if you are not working for awards. I

None of the emailed cards I’ve received have had digital signatures. But if they did, I would support them being accepted. The other side of this is that some hams want to give you a reason to send

I appreciate all the comments. It gives me pause as to how to proceed when I receive a qsl via email. There is software available to generate a paper qsl from a log or adi file. I don’t wish

I agree. There will be many more of these email qsls. I have received a couple and I have been fairly inactive. It seems to be a newer service that also sends out buro cards.

Emailed cards with digital signatures should be accepted. They are not but they should be. Many MUCH more important legal papers are. I am not holding my breath here though. Outlook LT Gil

Please don’t ignore it. A fellow ham took some trouble to acknowledge a contact with your station. Please don’t ignore it. 73, de Hans, KØHB “Just a Boy and his Radio”™

I actively work towards ARRL awards and value LoTW confirmations. I also am a county hunter and value eQSL confirmations. Not everyone uses wither so paper still works for me. In fact not

OMG !!! This thread amazes me, although some what enjoyable at times did we really answer the question, I will take a stab at it and probably fall far from the bullseye :) The original question

Ria, Well, point taken about North Korea. I'm not going to look for their operators, but I'll work them out of courtesy if they call me. To me it's like talking with Cubans. I'll leave that topic

There is no specific requirement to sign QSL cards. Card checkers do examine cards for physical signs of forgery or non-adherence to the rules. The handwritten signature puts something on the card

Come on Gordon........ Steve, N4JQQ On 1/16/2022 10:05 PM, w2ttt wrote:

Ria, Does this mean that mailed cards need to be signed? I have received printed QSL cards in an envelope. Are they not valid? If they are valid, or have been valid in the past, then how are they

Mia culpa, Dave. My point is that every QSL is valid to those who participated in the contact. ARRL has no say in that matter, except in the case that you might wish to apply for one of their

Hans, I think you quoted the wrong post, I did not say they were "invalid", I said the value was to the holder, and sender... You quoted "invalid", and I did not use the word "invalid", so I am