Always glad to confirm a SWL report.

However I will ALWAYS reject one with no description of who I was in QSO with or at the very least what i was doing when he logged me. Please SWL's be more accurate and forthcoming in the comments section when asking for verification. Yes this even includes JT65/JT9 Modes! :) also a 599 as a signal report to a JT65 station has no value!

73

Terry

ve3tkb@yahoo.com

---

VE3TKB Terry Kevin Bendell
Edited by VE3TKB Terry on May 20, 2014 at 04:54 PM

Hi Terry,

I had confirmed a few days before an eqsl from an English swl, without any detail, call, my rst was 599. I added a comment to tell him that at least, he could have mentionned who I was in qso with, a true JT65 report.....
And today, 5 eqsl's !!! from the same swl.....for the same afternoon..., same band, JT65 mode, nothing , not even "73", an empty comment line !
I think I will do the same as you next time

73
Guy

---

F6DKQ Guy FALCOZ

Guy,

Can you contact me and tell me the callsign of that SWL? We have received complaints over in the support queue over the last couple of months about a couple of SWLs doing this with JT65 mode QSOs. One of the users that complained had even received multiple eQSLs for the same JT65 QSO!

I think they are running some kind of script to pull out callsigns from JT65 QSOs, or maybe just pulling out callsigns from a spotting site. Either way, it's an abuse of the system and a PITA for HAMs to be receiving these useless reports.

---

73, Dave - VA3KAB

Ok, Dave,
I send you a private message to the adress I found in qrz.com (*****@gmail.com)
Partial screen capture of my archive included.

73 de Guy F6DKQ

---

F6DKQ Guy FALCOZ

Thanks Guy, Terry also sent me a PM with the callsign, and it is the same SWL station I have received complaints about over in the support queue.

I'm talking to Dave, N5UP about the situation.

---

73, Dave - VA3KAB

Hi

Its all very well listening to QSO's, but some times the stations I listen to I can not here the other contact and therefore when I send a QSL Card it is to confirm that I have heard the station that I have heard...

To be honest I not at least bothered with the awards just the fact that I have heard a station in a far of country and the station has details that I have heard them..

Yes I know that I can hear the station identify the station that they are in QSO with but at the end of the day I still get a lot of QSL Cards from hams who are not bothered a QSL card is confirmation that I have heard the station I am sending to..

Regards

---

MA3077SWL Liam Kennnedy

Hi Liam,

It doesn't matter that you can't hear both sides of the QSO. You should be able to tell who the station is working though by hearing one side of the QSO.

The reason hams like to see this in the comment field of an SWL report is so that they can quickly check their logs to see if they actually had a QSO with the station mentioned at the time of your report.

---

73, Dave - VA3KAB

Hey guys.
I do a lot of short wave listening and I always try my best to give all the information required by the station I am sending a card to, but there seems to be so many stations out there who just can't be bothered to reply to me. In saying that I have had a couple of cards come nearly a year late.
The other thing which I am sure annoy's many other people is the fact that a lot of stations out there talk to fast and make it very hard to try and pick up there call sign.

Hope I have put this post in the correct place, if not. Sorry.

Paul

---

26WT41SWL Paul Glover

Hi Paul, not all hams are interested in receiving SWL reports, but I think the majority do not mind confirming reports from SWLs.

---

73, Dave - VA3KAB

Hello there,
I would like to respond to this thread. Being myself SWL (AG), I confess that I sometimes forget to change the mode / Band of my logbook. Well sure, I realize after sending the eQSL. I know for certain operator like you, you do not like it. By cons, if it's just a story mode / band, be a little understanding if the rest of the information is correct.
For what is my case, I try to collect a maximum of 2 stations info logger before in my notebook.

Also, there has consistently rejected the OM SWL eQSL, I am the true a while ago: D I sent my report to stations 2, I had a confirmation and a rejection of the other ... it's not very cool.

73`Fabien - F16384

---

F16384 Fabien crapeau

As far as an eQSL with incorrect band/mode goes if I get one of these from a HAM account, I reject it.

It is very important to reject an eQSL if the QSO details are incorrect! The reason is, if I accepted the eQSL I would be getting credit for a band or mode that I did not earn.

---

73, Dave - VA3KAB

for JT65 QSO I needed some time and a HAM friend explanation to understand what I have to report in my eQSLs.
Now for JT65 - beside basic things like time, band call sign, date, mode.... - I usually report: RST in dB value as i read from the decoder (JT65 HF or Multipsk). QSO details I have always reported: both call signs.

Anyway I still have to claim that 50-60% confirmation rate is a little "poor"....expecially considering that some "rare" countries have few HAMs and in may cases they are not responsive which makes me angry a little...Bahrain (the ham station rejected 3 times my eQSLs for 3 different QSOs with no reason), Cuba: the ham station is not checking the inbox, south Korea, Morocco, Senegal, Ceuta and Melilla.....and others....

I am at 98 confrmed AG countries for the eDX and if the above countris would confirm....

Would it be possible to increase the numbers and type of e Awatds available for SWL????????????

73, oscar

---

IT2024SWL oscar marazzini

I confirm SWL happily if they have the details AND the QSO wasn't spotted on a DX cluster that I monitor.

Anyone can copy info from a DX cluster, and yes, I have received SWL reports from stuff that didn't happen but got put on a cluster.

---

73 de
VE3OIJ Darin Cowan

Have been an SWL since 1980 and I have a return ratio of 65% of the reports I send, be it Eqsl or paper. SO I cannot complain I guess.
Try to give as much details as possible and more than 1 station he's working ( I usually give 4). Remember as SWL you have to attrack the attention of the HAM make the report interesting for him, and THEN you will get a confirmation.
Hope this helps,
Peter, ONL-5923 (aka ON2WAB)

---

ON2WAB/P Peter Destoop

I am always confirming SWL reports as a courtesy, if they are correct. For me to consider an eQSL SWL report to be correct, it must have clearly stated:
- That it is an SWL report (not a QSO confirmation). Sometimes also licensed hams are sending eQSL SWL reports and if the "SWL" is not mentioned, I may reject the "QSO" after a search through my logs, because it is not found.
- UTC date and time. Preferably this should be accurate to +/- 1 minute. All PC clocks are drifting, but it is easy enough to synchronize it with an on-line time server.
- The call sign of the station I was working with. Don't send a report for my CQ call. I do not log them and thus cannot confirm that I was transmitting at that time.
- Band or frequency I was working on
- Operating mode
- A REAL signal report. An "always 599" is often not acceptable. Also the report must be of the format used for the mode I was working.
- Identification ("call sign") name and QTH of the SWL.

That should not be too difficult to do. To be fair, most SWL eQSLs I receive do fulfil the requirements mentioned above. Unless ALL that info is available in the eQSL I receive and it is correct, I WILL reject the SWL report, just like I would do for a 2-way QSO. SWLs should remember that as such an SWL QSL does not have much value to a licensed ham, except for the REAL signal report (SWL QSLs cannot be used towards any awards, for example) and they are confirmed only as a courtesy.

---

SV9RMU Jukka Siitari