Log4OM

Hello,

it is possible added in the future versions possibility to generate and send qsl card via email from Log4OM.

Good Idea

Hi

It is an excellent idea!

A few weeks ago I had a qso and after a few minutes I received the qsl card by email. Very useful.

With the qsl received by email, we will be able to print, and at the same time, save inside Log4OM in a folder created for this purpose.

The idea I wrote in the post "eQSL Viewer" : https://forum.log4om.com/viewtopic.php?f=41&t=6499 , could also be applied not only to eQSL but also to qsl received by email. After giving the instruction to be saved in the folder that Log4OM designates and thus we would have the possibility to see all the qsl.

A detail to take into consideration.
The QSl card would be created by the user in JPG or other format and Log4OM would fill in the spaces provided with the QSO details.

I have recently received a few QSL cards by email which use this software http://pa4r.com/qslmanager/.
Personally I think it is a waste of time as they are no use for any award collecting.

Hi all
What is an email QSL valid for ?
It would be more usefull to get on to LoTW (it is free) where your confirmation can be used by the other party.
I'd rather see some efforts on the label design rather than on these useless developments...

F6EXV wrote: ↑15 Apr 2021, 14:36 Hi all
What is an email QSL valid for ?

Could be valid for everything. Since years it´s not longer needed that a QSL is signed by hand.
We operate with labels and we print into QSL cards so why should an Email QSL not be valid ?

I use LotW, i use EQSL (AG), also Clublog and the german DCL and some other way´s but from
time to time you would receive an Email QSL from guys which are not in a club and things like
that. I find it´s a nice idea if it does not make Log4OM slower ...

Hello Juergen
A paper QSLshould be either signed by hand, or with a rubber stamp. Otherwise, they can be easily forged.
As of LoTW, the system has proven (untill further notice) that it cannot be forged.
Serious awards need serious confirmations.

It is extremely easy for"forge" an email QSL. I want to hope that 99.99% of the ham population is not into forging, but...

But how about a decent looking label out of Log4OM ?

Hello Paul,
Suppose you are an award manager and get a package of QSL from me. Every one was filled and signed by hand. How can you determine that they all are genuine? Do you have a specimen of the handwriting of all the participants?
Otherwise suppose I am an award manager and get an eQSL forwarded as an attachment to the original email. If it originates from the same address as it is shown in QRZ.com for instance, for me it is as credible as the handwriting one.
Whats more, if you want proof the handwriting QSL is forged you have to employ a graphologist. To proof the eQSL is forged you can do some checkup in open sources, and eventually ask the issuer of QSL using e-mail address he/she put in some credible list of licensed hams.
So in my view eQSL is as credible as the classical paper ones.
In my country e-mails are considered as traditional letters in offices, even though without qualified signature. Some important cases require qualified signature, or personal appearance in the office, but truth to tell significance of HAM's awards are not comparable to the extension of expired passport for instance.
Of course I appreciate those who collect traditional QSLs, and I always sent it to them if they ask (via e-mail or OQRS), but I think It has same value as practicing CW for example. I really admire such devoted passionates, but please don't depreciate those, who prefer e-mails, eQSL and FT8.
It all is for fun, so lets get fun.