|
Savas Pavlidis
Dear Roman, As we all read these days and will continue to read in the near future - rest assured of this - there are quite a few complaints/queries about rejecting contacts / HQSL with the reason ''county line - log only'' To be more clear, I take my own case. I'm doing this ONLY for practical reasons because I have my own data in my hand, but I'm ABSOLUTELY sure that this matter concerns similar hundreds of radio amateurs who support this particular RDA award. I have 16 cases with new one RDAs that were rejected as ''county line - log only'' All contacts are on dates after JULY 2022 All contacts are from ACTIVATORS All contacts are from activities with double RDAs All contacts have a valid and complete data HQSL in HAMLOG All HQSLs list/included the specific RDA (both 2 RDAs as usual)  So I ask: Why these HQSLs are rejected? To issue a corresponding and valid card from HAMLOG means: a) the logbook was uploaded by the ACTIVATOR in HAMLOG and b) my callsign included in this logbook Certainly, the ACTIVATORs did me no favors. Well, the QSO really happened, the contact is in a logbook which uploaded to HAMLOG and the result is the issuance of a VALID and with complete data HQSL as an electronic card, that you normally accepted till now! So I ask again: Why these HQSLs are rejected? If your system has not received these logbooks due to known issues (when mydx.eu was down) it is certainly not our fault. We cannot chase the ACTIVATORs (by email or with other ways) to re-upload the logbook to your system again. It's absurd! Maybe for their own reasons, they never try to upload it again. The reality is ONLY this one: They have already uploaded their logbook to HAMLOG and this cannot be disputed since a correct and complete card has been issued which contains the corresponding RDA with ALL the necessary data. - You don't trust the HAMLOG? - You don't trust the ACTIVATORS? You wrote in a reply recently in the forum "These HQSL contain two or three RDA regions, but logs for these expeditions must necessarily be uploaded to the RDA Autocfm http://rdaward.ru/index.php. Otherwise, such HQSL are not accepted.'' What? after so many months? Crazy! No offense to you, but believe me, I think it's completely a WRONG approach. ACTIVATORS have already uploaded the log to HAMLOG and the benefit of this action is the release of a full and legal HQSL. If you trust HAMLOG and your ACTIVATORS too, those HQSLs should be approved as it is. Not talk about the fact that ALL (exactly ALL, in all bands) of the above contacts have been accepted by the 9Band RDA Program (CFMRDA). I know you are not interested about that because it is another program ''foreign'' to you. - We understand some ''special'' cases as with R7PKS rejected contacts in which you have doubts. Do you have also doubts about those activators which you rejected these contacts? . I'm not just talking about my simple 16 cases. Really I don't care if I have 16 more RDAs in my account. As I saw, there are many other similar cases with many other RDA hunters from different activators. - We understand that after all, that happened with mydx.eu you faced with a lot of difficulties. - We understand that building a new platform is very difficult too - We understand your huge task with checking thousands of requests/images recently BUT... Many of us spent a lot of time making these contacts always participating in huge pileups and some of these RDAs took a long time to activate. Also, no one knows ''when'' or ''if'' that particular RDA will be reactivated again soon. So a simple answer of the type: - ''Work with someone else'', or - ''We do a Hobby is not something important'' they don't cover us and we don't consider them as serious answers. In conclusion: I think rejecting certified contacts who already have a complete and correct HQSL card, is a wrong decision and should be reconsidered. Be sure that all participants have a similar point of view about it. Many thanks Vy 73 de SV2AEL Savas
|
|
|
I agree with most opinions of Savas.
However, I think one way forward is that Roman as owner of RDA Award Program, create a general open letter to RDA activators with the explanations of what happened, and his wish that RDA activators who activated double, triple and quadruple RDAs, make a kind effort and also upload logs to the new site rdaward.ru
This letter can be saved as a PDF and also be downloaded from the site, if anyone wants to send it also to any such activator.
I have written personally to about 10 such stations, many on Savas list. About 40-50% have gladly accepted uploading ALL their activation logs from mid July to now. It has helped me and other hunters.
However, a much more efficient way would be if Roman as head of the program, collected all stations concerned, and sent a kind request to them for upload help. His authority has obviously more influence than individual RDAers.
This would probably help solving the majority of cases. The downloadable PDF letter with Roman's signature could solve most remaining issues, when we send private emails to the missing activators...
Hamlog is NOT the key system for RDA hunters, but a good complement.
73 de Mats RM2D (SM6LRR)
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023, 06:52 Savas Pavlidis < sv2ael@...> wrote: Dear Roman, As we all read these days and will continue to read in the near future - rest assured of this - there are quite a few complaints/queries about rejecting contacts / HQSL with the reason ''county line - log only'' To be more clear, I take my own case. I'm doing this ONLY for practical reasons because I have my own data in my hand, but I'm ABSOLUTELY sure that this matter concerns similar hundreds of radio amateurs who support this particular RDA award. I have 16 cases with new one RDAs that were rejected as ''county line - log only'' All contacts are on dates after JULY 2022 All contacts are from ACTIVATORS All contacts are from activities with double RDAs All contacts have a valid and complete data HQSL in HAMLOG All HQSLs list/included the specific RDA (both 2 RDAs as usual)  So I ask: Why these HQSLs are rejected? To issue a corresponding and valid card from HAMLOG means: a) the logbook was uploaded by the ACTIVATOR in HAMLOG and b) my callsign included in this logbook Certainly, the ACTIVATORs did me no favors. Well, the QSO really happened, the contact is in a logbook which uploaded to HAMLOG and the result is the issuance of a VALID and with complete data HQSL as an electronic card, that you normally accepted till now! So I ask again: Why these HQSLs are rejected? If your system has not received these logbooks due to known issues (when mydx.eu was down) it is certainly not our fault. We cannot chase the ACTIVATORs (by email or with other ways) to re-upload the logbook to your system again. It's absurd! Maybe for their own reasons, they never try to upload it again. The reality is ONLY this one: They have already uploaded their logbook to HAMLOG and this cannot be disputed since a correct and complete card has been issued which contains the corresponding RDA with ALL the necessary data. - You don't trust the HAMLOG? - You don't trust the ACTIVATORS? You wrote in a reply recently in the forum "These HQSL contain two or three RDA regions, but logs for these expeditions must necessarily be uploaded to the RDA Autocfm http://rdaward.ru/index.php. Otherwise, such HQSL are not accepted.'' What? after so many months? Crazy! No offense to you, but believe me, I think it's completely a WRONG approach. ACTIVATORS have already uploaded the log to HAMLOG and the benefit of this action is the release of a full and legal HQSL. If you trust HAMLOG and your ACTIVATORS too, those HQSLs should be approved as it is. Not talk about the fact that ALL (exactly ALL, in all bands) of the above contacts have been accepted by the 9Band RDA Program (CFMRDA). I know you are not interested about that because it is another program ''foreign'' to you. - We understand some ''special'' cases as with R7PKS rejected contacts in which you have doubts. Do you have also doubts about those activators which you rejected these contacts? . I'm not just talking about my simple 16 cases. Really I don't care if I have 16 more RDAs in my account. As I saw, there are many other similar cases with many other RDA hunters from different activators. - We understand that after all, that happened with mydx.eu you faced with a lot of difficulties. - We understand that building a new platform is very difficult too - We understand your huge task with checking thousands of requests/images recently BUT... Many of us spent a lot of time making these contacts always participating in huge pileups and some of these RDAs took a long time to activate. Also, no one knows ''when'' or ''if'' that particular RDA will be reactivated again soon. So a simple answer of the type: - ''Work with someone else'', or - ''We do a Hobby is not something important'' they don't cover us and we don't consider them as serious answers. In conclusion: I think rejecting certified contacts who already have a complete and correct HQSL card, is a wrong decision and should be reconsidered. Be sure that all participants have a similar point of view about it. Many thanks Vy 73 de SV2AEL Savas
|
|
|
Hi, I fully agree with Savas and Mats, only one who needs to push those stations to upload their logs and submit their papers is the award program manager. We all worked at those stations and for many of us those RDA are ATNOs, those are confirmed and uploaded on other 2 sites, because of matches in the logs QSO are all valid.
It is not our fault that mydx was down and you started to build from scratch the new site,
Hat down to R1CF - great job.
But the chasing was still going and will go on beacuse RDA are very popular, look at those pile-ups! Many of us probably kept the mydx.eu XLS for our own statistics and most of the QSOs are valid there, I still have it dated from November 2022.
Adding county lines QSO's to the upload system not only will make people happy, you will not lose any hunters or activators in the future! Thanks to the activators for the great job they done with small setups, their time and money spent activating new RDAs.
73, Patrik 9A5CW
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023 at 5:23 AM SM6LRR < sm6lrr@...> wrote: I agree with most opinions of Savas.
However, I think one way forward is that Roman as owner of RDA Award Program, create a general open letter to RDA activators with the explanations of what happened, and his wish that RDA activators who activated double, triple and quadruple RDAs, make a kind effort and also upload logs to the new site rdaward.ru
This letter can be saved as a PDF and also be downloaded from the site, if anyone wants to send it also to any such activator.
I have written personally to about 10 such stations, many on Savas list. About 40-50% have gladly accepted uploading ALL their activation logs from mid July to now. It has helped me and other hunters.
However, a much more efficient way would be if Roman as head of the program, collected all stations concerned, and sent a kind request to them for upload help. His authority has obviously more influence than individual RDAers.
This would probably help solving the majority of cases. The downloadable PDF letter with Roman's signature could solve most remaining issues, when we send private emails to the missing activators...
Hamlog is NOT the key system for RDA hunters, but a good complement.
73 de Mats RM2D (SM6LRR)
On Tue, Feb 21, 2023, 06:52 Savas Pavlidis < sv2ael@...> wrote: Dear Roman, As we all read these days and will continue to read in the near future - rest assured of this - there are quite a few complaints/queries about rejecting contacts / HQSL with the reason ''county line - log only'' To be more clear, I take my own case. I'm doing this ONLY for practical reasons because I have my own data in my hand, but I'm ABSOLUTELY sure that this matter concerns similar hundreds of radio amateurs who support this particular RDA award. I have 16 cases with new one RDAs that were rejected as ''county line - log only'' All contacts are on dates after JULY 2022 All contacts are from ACTIVATORS All contacts are from activities with double RDAs All contacts have a valid and complete data HQSL in HAMLOG All HQSLs list/included the specific RDA (both 2 RDAs as usual)  So I ask: Why these HQSLs are rejected? To issue a corresponding and valid card from HAMLOG means: a) the logbook was uploaded by the ACTIVATOR in HAMLOG and b) my callsign included in this logbook Certainly, the ACTIVATORs did me no favors. Well, the QSO really happened, the contact is in a logbook which uploaded to HAMLOG and the result is the issuance of a VALID and with complete data HQSL as an electronic card, that you normally accepted till now! So I ask again: Why these HQSLs are rejected? If your system has not received these logbooks due to known issues (when mydx.eu was down) it is certainly not our fault. We cannot chase the ACTIVATORs (by email or with other ways) to re-upload the logbook to your system again. It's absurd! Maybe for their own reasons, they never try to upload it again. The reality is ONLY this one: They have already uploaded their logbook to HAMLOG and this cannot be disputed since a correct and complete card has been issued which contains the corresponding RDA with ALL the necessary data. - You don't trust the HAMLOG? - You don't trust the ACTIVATORS? You wrote in a reply recently in the forum "These HQSL contain two or three RDA regions, but logs for these expeditions must necessarily be uploaded to the RDA Autocfm http://rdaward.ru/index.php. Otherwise, such HQSL are not accepted.'' What? after so many months? Crazy! No offense to you, but believe me, I think it's completely a WRONG approach. ACTIVATORS have already uploaded the log to HAMLOG and the benefit of this action is the release of a full and legal HQSL. If you trust HAMLOG and your ACTIVATORS too, those HQSLs should be approved as it is. Not talk about the fact that ALL (exactly ALL, in all bands) of the above contacts have been accepted by the 9Band RDA Program (CFMRDA). I know you are not interested about that because it is another program ''foreign'' to you. - We understand some ''special'' cases as with R7PKS rejected contacts in which you have doubts. Do you have also doubts about those activators which you rejected these contacts? . I'm not just talking about my simple 16 cases. Really I don't care if I have 16 more RDAs in my account. As I saw, there are many other similar cases with many other RDA hunters from different activators. - We understand that after all, that happened with mydx.eu you faced with a lot of difficulties. - We understand that building a new platform is very difficult too - We understand your huge task with checking thousands of requests/images recently BUT... Many of us spent a lot of time making these contacts always participating in huge pileups and some of these RDAs took a long time to activate. Also, no one knows ''when'' or ''if'' that particular RDA will be reactivated again soon. So a simple answer of the type: - ''Work with someone else'', or - ''We do a Hobby is not something important'' they don't cover us and we don't consider them as serious answers. In conclusion: I think rejecting certified contacts who already have a complete and correct HQSL card, is a wrong decision and should be reconsidered. Be sure that all participants have a similar point of view about it. Many thanks Vy 73 de SV2AEL Savas
-- 9A5CW - Patrik Hrvatin
--... ...--
|
|
|
Kali mera Savas,
you are right.
Why don't we ( we is the comunity of RDAhunters) get clear rules
for the different cases of recognition,
especially county-line cofirmations.
What are the problems to approve the old EUDX.EU- standings?
Questions about questions. When will we get an answer?
73 and jassu Bernd DJ4GJ
Am 21.02.2023 um 03:52 schrieb Savas
Pavlidis:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Dear Roman,
As we all read these days and will continue to read in the near
future - rest assured of this - there are quite a few
complaints/queries about rejecting contacts / HQSL with the reason
''county line - log only''
To be more clear, I take my own case.
I'm doing this ONLY for practical reasons because I have my own
data in my hand, but I'm ABSOLUTELY sure that this matter concerns
similar hundreds of radio amateurs who support this particular RDA
award.
I have 16 cases with new one RDAs that were rejected as ''county
line - log only''
All contacts are on dates after JULY 2022
All contacts are from ACTIVATORS
All contacts are from activities with double RDAs
All contacts have a valid and complete data HQSL in HAMLOG
All HQSLs list/included the specific RDA (both 2 RDAs as usual)
So I ask: Why these HQSLs are rejected?
To issue a corresponding and valid card from HAMLOG means:
a) the logbook was uploaded by the ACTIVATOR in HAMLOG and
b) my callsign included in this logbook
Certainly, the ACTIVATORs did me no favors.
Well, the QSO really happened, the contact is in a logbook which
uploaded to HAMLOG and the result is the issuance of a VALID and
with complete data HQSL as an electronic card, that you normally
accepted till now!
So I ask again: Why these HQSLs are rejected?
If your system has not received these logbooks due to known issues
(when mydx.eu was down) it is certainly not our fault.
We cannot chase the ACTIVATORs (by email or with other ways) to
re-upload the logbook to your system again. It's absurd!
Maybe for their own reasons, they never try to upload it again.
The reality is ONLY this one: They have already uploaded their
logbook to HAMLOG and this cannot be disputed since a correct and
complete card has been issued which contains the corresponding RDA
with ALL the necessary data.
- You don't trust the HAMLOG?
- You don't trust the ACTIVATORS?
You wrote in a reply recently in the forum "These HQSL contain two
or three RDA regions, but logs for these expeditions must
necessarily be uploaded to the RDA Autocfm
http://rdaward.ru/index.php. Otherwise, such HQSL are not
accepted.''
What? after so many months? Crazy!
No offense to you, but believe me, I think it's completely a WRONG
approach.
ACTIVATORS have already uploaded the log to HAMLOG and the benefit
of this action is the release of a full and legal HQSL.
If you trust HAMLOG and your ACTIVATORS too, those HQSLs should
be approved as it is.
Not talk about the fact that ALL (exactly ALL, in all bands) of
the above contacts have been accepted by the 9Band RDA Program
(CFMRDA). I know you are not interested about that because it is
another program ''foreign'' to you.
- We understand some ''special'' cases as with R7PKS rejected
contacts in which you have doubts. Do you have also doubts about
those activators which you rejected these contacts? . I'm not just
talking about my simple 16 cases. Really I don't care if I have 16
more RDAs in my account. As I saw, there are many other similar
cases with many other RDA hunters from different activators.
- We understand that after all, that happened with mydx.eu you
faced with a lot of difficulties.
- We understand that building a new platform is very difficult too
- We understand your huge task with checking thousands of
requests/images recently
BUT...
Many of us spent a lot of time making these contacts always
participating in huge pileups and some of these RDAs took a long
time to activate.
Also, no one knows ''when'' or ''if'' that particular RDA will be
reactivated again soon.
So a simple answer of the type:
- ''Work with someone else'', or
- ''We do a Hobby is not something important''
they don't cover us and we don't consider them as serious answers.
In conclusion:
I think rejecting certified contacts who already have a complete
and correct HQSL card, is a wrong decision and should be
reconsidered.
Be sure that all participants have a similar point of view about
it.
Many thanks
Vy 73 de SV2AEL Savas
|
|
|
Dear Savas, dear Roman, dear friends! First of all, I would like to thank Savas for the excellent and precise presentation of the situation regarding the rejection of QSOs from HAMLog/HQSL with the reference "county line - log only" and agree 100% with this view. This is actually not an attack on Roman RA3R but rather a recognition of the great achievements so far in this difficult situation. Rather, this summary is intended to support Roman together with R1CF in their efforts to find the broadest possible solution to this difficult situation. Dear Roman, I think the path proposed by Savas requires a reconsideration of the previous decision, but with the courage shown so far to solve the problems, a differentiated view should also lead to a comprehensible and according to the rules and adapted decision. A courageous decision probably also in the sense of Aadu, ES1TU, of real HAM spirit and for all participants in this great program. In this way, I wish you Roman the necessary courage and the continuation of the foresight he has already shown. With the best 73! Peter OE3PKU Von: rdaworld@groups.io [mailto:rdaworld@groups.io] Im Auftrag von dj4gj
Gesendet: Dienstag, 21. Februar 2023 12:21
An: rdaworld@groups.io
Betreff: Re: [rdaworld] Rejecting contacts / HQSL with the reason ''county line - log only'' *IMPORTANT* Kali mera Savas, you are right. Why don't we ( we is the comunity of RDAhunters) get clear rules for the different cases of recognition, especially county-line cofirmations. What are the problems to approve the old EUDX.EU- standings? Questions about questions. When will we get an answer? 73 and jassu Bernd DJ4GJ Am 21.02.2023 um 03:52 schrieb Savas Pavlidis:
Dear Roman,
As we all read these days and will continue to read in the near future - rest assured of this - there are quite a few complaints/queries about rejecting contacts / HQSL with the reason ''county line - log only''
To be more clear, I take my own case.
I'm doing this ONLY for practical reasons because I have my own data in my hand, but I'm ABSOLUTELY sure that this matter concerns similar hundreds of radio amateurs who support this particular RDA award.
I have 16 cases with new one RDAs that were rejected as ''county line - log only''
All contacts are on dates after JULY 2022
All contacts are from ACTIVATORS
All contacts are from activities with double RDAs
All contacts have a valid and complete data HQSL in HAMLOG
All HQSLs list/included the specific RDA (both 2 RDAs as usual)
So I ask: Why these HQSLs are rejected?
To issue a corresponding and valid card from HAMLOG means:
a) the logbook was uploaded by the ACTIVATOR in HAMLOG and
b) my callsign included in this logbook
Certainly, the ACTIVATORs did me no favors.
Well, the QSO really happened, the contact is in a logbook which uploaded to HAMLOG and the result is the issuance of a VALID and with complete data HQSL as an electronic card, that you normally accepted till now!
So I ask again: Why these HQSLs are rejected?
If your system has not received these logbooks due to known issues (when mydx.eu was down) it is certainly not our fault.
We cannot chase the ACTIVATORs (by email or with other ways) to re-upload the logbook to your system again. It's absurd!
Maybe for their own reasons, they never try to upload it again.
The reality is ONLY this one: They have already uploaded their logbook to HAMLOG and this cannot be disputed since a correct and complete card has been issued which contains the corresponding RDA with ALL the necessary data.
- You don't trust the HAMLOG?
- You don't trust the ACTIVATORS?
You wrote in a reply recently in the forum "These HQSL contain two or three RDA regions, but logs for these expeditions must necessarily be uploaded to the RDA Autocfm http://rdaward.ru/index.php. Otherwise, such HQSL are not accepted.''
What? after so many months? Crazy!
No offense to you, but believe me, I think it's completely a WRONG approach.
ACTIVATORS have already uploaded the log to HAMLOG and the benefit of this action is the release of a full and legal HQSL.
If you trust HAMLOG and your ACTIVATORS too, those HQSLs should be approved as it is.
Not talk about the fact that ALL (exactly ALL, in all bands) of the above contacts have been accepted by the 9Band RDA Program (CFMRDA). I know you are not interested about that because it is another program ''foreign'' to you.
- We understand some ''special'' cases as with R7PKS rejected contacts in which you have doubts. Do you have also doubts about those activators which you rejected these contacts? . I'm not just talking about my simple 16 cases. Really I don't care if I have 16 more RDAs in my account. As I saw, there are many other similar cases with many other RDA hunters from different activators.
- We understand that after all, that happened with mydx.eu you faced with a lot of difficulties.
- We understand that building a new platform is very difficult too
- We understand your huge task with checking thousands of requests/images recently
BUT...
Many of us spent a lot of time making these contacts always participating in huge pileups and some of these RDAs took a long time to activate.
Also, no one knows ''when'' or ''if'' that particular RDA will be reactivated again soon.
So a simple answer of the type:
- ''Work with someone else'', or
- ''We do a Hobby is not something important''
they don't cover us and we don't consider them as serious answers.
In conclusion:
I think rejecting certified contacts who already have a complete and correct HQSL card, is a wrong decision and should be reconsidered.
Be sure that all participants have a similar point of view about it.
Many thanks
Vy 73 de SV2AEL Savas
|
|
|
Savas Pavlidis
Totally agree Peter.
Nobody wants to attack Roman for personal reasons. It is NOT a personal rivalry.
The respect to Roman's character, to his knowledge, and to his work is very high from all of us.
I just still believe - and I'm not the only one - this particular decision was wrong.
As he has the rule, that Activator's logbooks must be uploaded into the system to accept contacts, similarly, he has that rule also: every complete and valid HQSL from HAMLOG that actually meet the specifications, can be a source to accept contacts too.
In any case, everything can be resolved through proper and honest dialogue.
73 Savas SV2AEL
|
|
|
At least the HQSL logs from the period between "end of mydx.eu" and "beginning of rdaward.ru" could be a matter of exception.
Onwards from rdaward.ru start I fully agree that only rdaward.ru should be used for multiple RDA verifications. There Roman has my full support.
For the integrity of the checking process, I fully support that Roman must have FULL access to the activators logs. Therefore, the only valid future way, would be upload to the Main system rdaward.ru
Hamlog HQSL can be used for single RDA's verifications onwards as well, but NOT for multi-RDA due to lack of transparency and details for Roman.
People = Activators must be taught that Main System is rdaward.ru
My future mobile activations will NOT be uploaded to Hamlog. I will exclusively use rdaward.ru and cfmrda.ru
Nothing else is needed until Hamlog and rdaward.ru eventually have agreed to restore previous cooperation.. And this is not the case now.
So Roman, please accept this proposal of compromise - to acknowledge multiple RDA HQSL for the period mentioned above. This would be a fair deal, as we know that the vast majority of such HQSL indeed are legitimate.
73 de Mats RM2D (SM6LRR)
On Thu, Feb 23, 2023, 01:34 Savas Pavlidis < sv2ael@...> wrote: Totally agree Peter.
Nobody wants to attack Roman for personal reasons. It is NOT a personal rivalry.
The respect to Roman's character, to his knowledge, and to his work is very high from all of us.
I just still believe - and I'm not the only one - this particular decision was wrong.
As he has the rule, that Activator's logbooks must be uploaded into the system to accept contacts, similarly, he has that rule also: every complete and valid HQSL from HAMLOG that actually meet the specifications, can be a source to accept contacts too.
In any case, everything can be resolved through proper and honest dialogue.
73 Savas SV2AEL
|
|
|
Danny Van Tricht ON4VT
Mats & Roman + group
I was pondering about the same idea : ONE exception to the RDA rule for double RDA's on hQSL : period july 2022 to january 2023 the hQSL with double RDA do count
They were accepted in the previous system that was QRT for (very sad) reasons beyond everyone's control. Pretty sure Aadu would aggree with this one time exception.
Roman, we leave it all up to you but I think you have to think about this.
73 Danny ON4VT
|
|
|
Dear friends!
My position is unambiguous, any
expedition to the border of RDA districts should be uploaded as a
log to the RDA Autocfm.
If there is no log, such an expedition
is not counted. This has been written in the rules for many years.
73! RA3R
Roman
23.02.2023 9:49, Danny Van Tricht ON4VT
пишет:
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
Mats & Roman + group
I was pondering about the same idea : ONE exception to the RDA
rule for double RDA's on hQSL : period july 2022 to january 2023
the hQSL with double RDA do count
They were accepted in the previous system that was QRT for (very
sad) reasons beyond everyone's control. Pretty sure Aadu would
aggree with this one time exception.
Roman, we leave it all up to you but I think you have to think
about this.
73 Danny ON4VT
|
|
|
Roman, this is a way too rigid approach according to my humble opinion. Just because there have been written rules for "many years", does not justify rigidity in this particular exceptional case. We as activarors are not to be blamed that a regular backup routine was not in place.
Either you are flexible and make an exception and accept multiple RDA HQSLs for the missing period July 17th 2022 - Jan 2023
Or -
We ask you as owner of the RDA program and only decision maker, to summarize which stations/activations are concerned - And approach each and every station with a kind request to resubmit logs to rdaward.ru
The current approach is clearly causing badwill for the RDA Award program.
Just my few cents on this topic.
73 de Mats RM2D (SM6LRR)
Dear friends!
My position is unambiguous, any
expedition to the border of RDA districts should be uploaded as a
log to the RDA Autocfm.
If there is no log, such an expedition
is not counted. This has been written in the rules for many years.
73! RA3R
Roman
23.02.2023 9:49, Danny Van Tricht ON4VT
пишет:
Mats & Roman + group
I was pondering about the same idea : ONE exception to the RDA
rule for double RDA's on hQSL : period july 2022 to january 2023
the hQSL with double RDA do count
They were accepted in the previous system that was QRT for (very
sad) reasons beyond everyone's control. Pretty sure Aadu would
aggree with this one time exception.
Roman, we leave it all up to you but I think you have to think
about this.
73 Danny ON4VT
|
|
|
Correction:
We as HUNTERS are not to be blamed that a regular backup routine was not in place.
73 de Mats RM2D (SM6LRR)
(Hunter AND activator)
Roman, this is a way too rigid approach according to my humble opinion. Just because there have been written rules for "many years", does not justify rigidity in this particular exceptional case. We as activarors are not to be blamed that a regular backup routine was not in place.
Either you are flexible and make an exception and accept multiple RDA HQSLs for the missing period July 17th 2022 - Jan 2023
Or -
We ask you as owner of the RDA program and only decision maker, to summarize which stations/activations are concerned - And approach each and every station with a kind request to resubmit logs to rdaward.ru
The current approach is clearly causing badwill for the RDA Award program.
Just my few cents on this topic.
73 de Mats RM2D (SM6LRR)
Dear friends!
My position is unambiguous, any
expedition to the border of RDA districts should be uploaded as a
log to the RDA Autocfm.
If there is no log, such an expedition
is not counted. This has been written in the rules for many years.
73! RA3R
Roman
23.02.2023 9:49, Danny Van Tricht ON4VT
пишет:
Mats & Roman + group
I was pondering about the same idea : ONE exception to the RDA
rule for double RDA's on hQSL : period july 2022 to january 2023
the hQSL with double RDA do count
They were accepted in the previous system that was QRT for (very
sad) reasons beyond everyone's control. Pretty sure Aadu would
aggree with this one time exception.
Roman, we leave it all up to you but I think you have to think
about this.
73 Danny ON4VT
|
|
|
Savas Pavlidis
Dear Roman,
Could you please give us an answer with a YES or a NO if the ACTIVATORS were able to upload their logbooks to your system from July 15th, 2022 till Jan 2023?
On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 at 09:25, SM6LRR < sm6lrr@...> wrote: Correction:
We as HUNTERS are not to be blamed that a regular backup routine was not in place.
73 de Mats RM2D (SM6LRR)
(Hunter AND activator)
Roman, this is a way too rigid approach according to my humble opinion. Just because there have been written rules for "many years", does not justify rigidity in this particular exceptional case. We as activarors are not to be blamed that a regular backup routine was not in place.
Either you are flexible and make an exception and accept multiple RDA HQSLs for the missing period July 17th 2022 - Jan 2023
Or -
We ask you as owner of the RDA program and only decision maker, to summarize which stations/activations are concerned - And approach each and every station with a kind request to resubmit logs to rdaward.ru
The current approach is clearly causing badwill for the RDA Award program.
Just my few cents on this topic.
73 de Mats RM2D (SM6LRR)
Dear friends!
My position is unambiguous, any
expedition to the border of RDA districts should be uploaded as a
log to the RDA Autocfm.
If there is no log, such an expedition
is not counted. This has been written in the rules for many years.
73! RA3R
Roman
23.02.2023 9:49, Danny Van Tricht ON4VT
пишет:
Mats & Roman + group
I was pondering about the same idea : ONE exception to the RDA
rule for double RDA's on hQSL : period july 2022 to january 2023
the hQSL with double RDA do count
They were accepted in the previous system that was QRT for (very
sad) reasons beyond everyone's control. Pretty sure Aadu would
aggree with this one time exception.
Roman, we leave it all up to you but I think you have to think
about this.
73 Danny ON4VT
|
|
|
Dear Mats, i am following with great interest the efforts to find a constructive and practicable solution for the period july 2022 to january 2023. Unfortunately, despite all efforts, i have so far only been able to recognize a clinging to the rules of the past, although these have allowed the possibility of recognizing 2 or 3 RDA. Is there a concrete answer from Roman to the proposal for an exemption? So far I could only see a repetition of the rules and rather a rejection of the proposal. Will there be further efforts anyway. Thanks for the constructive efforts. Kind regards,
Peter OE3PKU
Von meinem/meiner Galaxy gesendet
-------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -------- Von: SM6LRR <sm6lrr@...> Datum: 23.02.23 08:25 (GMT+01:00) An: rdaworld@groups.io Betreff: Re: [rdaworld] Rejecting contacts / HQSL with the reason ''county line - log only'' *IMPORTANT*
Correction:
We as HUNTERS are not to be blamed that a regular backup routine was not in place.
73 de Mats RM2D (SM6LRR)
(Hunter AND activator)
Roman, this is a way too rigid approach according to my humble opinion. Just because there have been written rules for "many years", does not justify rigidity in this particular exceptional case. We as activarors are not to be blamed that a regular backup routine was not in place.
Either you are flexible and make an exception and accept multiple RDA HQSLs for the missing period July 17th 2022 - Jan 2023
Or -
We ask you as owner of the RDA program and only decision maker, to summarize which stations/activations are concerned - And approach each and every station with a kind request to resubmit logs to rdaward.ru
The current approach is clearly causing badwill for the RDA Award program.
Just my few cents on this topic.
73 de Mats RM2D (SM6LRR)
Dear friends!
My position is unambiguous, any
expedition to the border of RDA districts should be uploaded as a
log to the RDA Autocfm.
If there is no log, such an expedition
is not counted. This has been written in the rules for many years.
73! RA3R
Roman
23.02.2023 9:49, Danny Van Tricht ON4VT
пишет:
Mats & Roman + group
I was pondering about the same idea : ONE exception to the RDA
rule for double RDA's on hQSL : period july 2022 to january 2023
the hQSL with double RDA do count
They were accepted in the previous system that was QRT for (very
sad) reasons beyond everyone's control. Pretty sure Aadu would
aggree with this one time exception.
Roman, we leave it all up to you but I think you have to think
about this.
73 Danny ON4VT
|
|
|
Dear Peter,
I assume that Roman is giving my proposal some thoughts. I do agree with him on the need for ability to check independent logs. However, the period July 17 2022 - Jan 2023 is a true exceptional situation that in my view requires flexibility, rather than clinging to old established rules.
I do not expect to fully reach 100% of my previously confirmed records in mydx.eu, but I do not wish to be penalized unnecessarily due to the fact that a backup system was not in place. I hope the R1CF - rdaward.ru regular backup routines have been established already now. Anything may happen with computers (and human beings). We want to a avoid a repetition of the current situations. Activators and hunters need to trust the system.
As said before, and I repeat it again:
An exceptional approval of multiple RDA HQSLs for the period July 17 2022 - Jan 2023 is the ideal solution. If Roman sees doubts with some of the logs/operations, he may contact the activator in question, and request additional information or proof. Nothing different from the R7PKS procedure being discussed.
Additionally, Roman can easily collect all stations with unapproved multiple RDA HQSLs, compose a general support letter politely asking those activators to help him (and activators) with repeated upload of logs in the system. Roman has excellent authority as the founder of the RDA award to have success with such letters. In fact, much better probability for success, than individual letters from activators.
Awaiting Roman's evaluation of my parallel proposal.
73 de Mats RM2D (SM6LRR)
RDA Activator & Hunter
Dear Mats, i am following with great interest the efforts to find a constructive and practicable solution for the period july 2022 to january 2023. Unfortunately, despite all efforts, i have so far only been able to recognize a clinging to the rules of the past, although these have allowed the possibility of recognizing 2 or 3 RDA. Is there a concrete answer from Roman to the proposal for an exemption? So far I could only see a repetition of the rules and rather a rejection of the proposal. Will there be further efforts anyway. Thanks for the constructive efforts. Kind regards,
Peter OE3PKU
Von meinem/meiner Galaxy gesendet
-------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -------- Datum: 23.02.23 08:25 (GMT+01:00) Betreff: Re: [rdaworld] Rejecting contacts / HQSL with the reason ''county line - log only'' *IMPORTANT*
Correction:
We as HUNTERS are not to be blamed that a regular backup routine was not in place.
73 de Mats RM2D (SM6LRR)
(Hunter AND activator) Roman, this is a way too rigid approach according to my humble opinion. Just because there have been written rules for "many years", does not justify rigidity in this particular exceptional case. We as activarors are not to be blamed that a regular backup routine was not in place.
Either you are flexible and make an exception and accept multiple RDA HQSLs for the missing period July 17th 2022 - Jan 2023
Or -
We ask you as owner of the RDA program and only decision maker, to summarize which stations/activations are concerned - And approach each and every station with a kind request to resubmit logs to rdaward.ru
The current approach is clearly causing badwill for the RDA Award program.
Just my few cents on this topic.
73 de Mats RM2D (SM6LRR)
Dear friends!
My position is unambiguous, any
expedition to the border of RDA districts should be uploaded as a
log to the RDA Autocfm.
If there is no log, such an expedition
is not counted. This has been written in the rules for many years.
73! RA3R
Roman
23.02.2023 9:49, Danny Van Tricht ON4VT
пишет:
Mats & Roman + group
I was pondering about the same idea : ONE exception to the RDA
rule for double RDA's on hQSL : period july 2022 to january 2023
the hQSL with double RDA do count
They were accepted in the previous system that was QRT for (very
sad) reasons beyond everyone's control. Pretty sure Aadu would
aggree with this one time exception.
Roman, we leave it all up to you but I think you have to think
about this.
73 Danny ON4VT
|
|
|
