Just wondering why certain hams, do not respond to QSL's?

Why are they members of eqsl if they have no intention of responding to other members QSL/requests?

It's the same with hams who are registered with QRZ.com. They seem not to want to acknowledge other hams QSO entries/logs.

So why are they members of these websites if they have no intention of responding to other hams?

Strange!!!

---

M3OZP Chris Rolfe

Hard to say Chris. I think in some cases users create an account here and then change their mind about uploading QSOs.

But! Never give up hope :) I received an eQSL from a station in Malta a few days ago for a QSO we had back in 2008. He has had an account here since 2003 but just uploaded his logs a few days ago. He also got Bronze membership, so looks like he is serious about staying active on the site.

---

73, Dave - VA3KAB

The QRZ.com log interface is Byzantine at best. Although my logs are complete there, I upload sporadically, and really make no special effort to keep them up to date... and I am a QRZ life member.

In that case, I wanted access to the other features of QRZ. I could live without the log part of it.

I treat LotW the same way... I upload when I get around to it, but it's a PITA that I only subject myself to when I'm in the mood.

For here, I've been a member for 7-ish years. I suspect many people get an account here and then find it difficult to use. When I watch my 75 year old father-in-law, who is an educated man, dealing with a laptop and a web site, then translate that over to a 75 year old ham who does morse code only on a transceiver older than me and has a computer that was set up by a grandchild so grampa can access facebook, I can imagine lots of accounts getting created, visited once or twice, then forgotten or ignored as "too much hassle".

There's another bunch (search around the forums, you can find them) who feel that AG violates their personal space in some way, or get in a snit when they find out that ARRL won't accept eQSL and blame eQSL for that - they create an account, then leave.

I like eQSL because for me, it's largely automatic. But I understand why other people don't.

---

73 de
VE3OIJ Darin Cowan

I am finding, at least over the past six months or so, more people are getting onto the eQSL bandwagon. At first I would hardly ever get a reply to an eQSL. Now over the past few contests I have been getting a much better return rate.

I list on my QRZ page that I only accept eQSL and do not use LoTW or send paper QSL cards. I also state that I send an eQSL for every HF contact that I log and they should stop in and collect their confirmation on the eQSL website. If they want a hard copy of the card they can then print it off on card stock.

I am not a big award chaser so LoTW doesn't do much for me. I enjoy getting the cards electronically and hope that eventually more people will understand the benefit of not having to pay postage, wait months for the card in the mail only to find that the card got damaged in transit. With eQSL they get their card within minutes in perfect condition.

It just doesn't get any better than that.

---

73 de Jeff VE6EFR

www.edmontonfireradio.com - Streaming live audio from the Edmonton Fire Rescue Services, Edmonton EMS and STARS Air Medical

I am new to HF, and Amateur Radio is general. I started with 2 meters and only got into HF this year. Maybe this is normal, but I find the best I can get is about 50% confirmation.

When I looked into logging things, I came across QRZ.COM, eQSL.cc and LoTW. It took me about a month to get LoTW working at all as there was an issue with generating my certificate. Du that time I started using QRZ and eQSL. I like QRZs interface better than eQSL but I got about 50% confirmations from eQSL. I get about 17% confirmation from LoTW and about 10% from QRZ.

I have over 110 QSO's and can't event get the handful confirmed that I would need for the "Worked All Continents" award.

dj haslbeck
kb3zum

---

KB3ZUM D.J. Haslbeck

Don,
You should be glad you get 50% confirmations in eQSL I'm happy getting 23% with 3165 in my OutBox and 714 in my archive. I'm getting about the same in LOTW and less in QRZ. The more you put in, the more you'll get out.
73

---

N1ORK Orest 'Andy' Zajac

I'm getting around 70% confirmation here. I think the difference is since 2006 I do only digital modes. It seems digital mode op's are more likely to confirm, not sure why that is, but I've heard similar stats from other digi-mode operators.

I don't use LoTW or QRZ logbook.

---

73, Dave - VA3KAB

Automatic logging/uploading built into digital mode software is probably a factor. I know I use it and love it for that very reason. I do make every effort to log and upload SSB contacts; but I'm sure I've missed some when I wasn't in front of or signed in to my station PC.

Most of my contesting is SSB, and I do upload the final log from any contest .. which obviously has to be accurately logged.

In general response my MO and why:
I agree with others that eQSL has a far superior intake system by allowing/being supported by HRD for automated instant uploads; LoTW I do in batches when I have the time. As for QRZ logs, just too much trouble. Only thing I do there is if I look up a call sign while in QSO; I will click the button for log a contact. Entering all the info manually .. no thanks. I would go into QRZ and confirm any QSO upon request, though.

---

AJ4DT Dennis E Tokarzewski