For John Plimmer: MW QSL's?1
 

Hello John,
Having just gotten back into MW DXing, I was wondering, do the
stations, primarily in North America, still send out the old "card"
type QSL cards? Last ones I had were from my high school days with
and old Hallicrafter's S-120!
Thanks,
Bob Grimes
--

For John Plimmer: MW QSL's?1
 

On Apr 26, 10:38*pm, "Count Floyd"
wrote:
Hello John,
Having just gotten back into MW DXing, I was wondering, do the
stations, primarily in North America, still send out the old "card"
type QSL cards? *Last ones I had were from my high school days with
and old Hallicrafter's S-120!
Thanks,
Bob Grimes
--

Hi Bob,
Mostly they don't - your lucky if you get a decent e-mail respone.

JP Montagu

For John Plimmer: MW QSL's?1
 

wrote:

On Apr 26, 10:38 pm, "Count Floyd"
wrote:
Hello John,
Having just gotten back into MW DXing, I was wondering, do the
stations, primarily in North America, still send out the old "card"
type QSL cards? Last ones I had were from my high school days with
and old Hallicrafter's S-120!
Thanks,
Bob Grimes
--

Hi Bob,
Mostly they don't - your lucky if you get a decent e-mail respone.

Anybody tried the prepared card route with the MW'ers?

For John Plimmer: MW QSL's?1
 

On 26 Apr, 22:38, "Count Floyd"
wrote:
Hello John,
Having just gotten back into MW DXing, I was wondering, do the
stations, primarily in North America, still send out the old "card"
type QSL cards? Last ones I had were from my high school days with
and old Hallicrafter's S-120!
Thanks,
Bob Grimes
--

Extremely few do. Of the 250 latest NA AM veries I've received in the
past 2-3 years, perhaps 3 or 4 were "old school" QSL cards. Most of
the rest were emails, including a few with a Word file or JPG file
attachment. Nowadays, addressing the Program Directors may be more
rewarding than addressing the Chief Engineers. And you will need to
accept verie texts like "yes, that's us" or similar instead of the
traditional QSL text.

Actually, writing a traditional reception report with program details
etc is probably going to get you nowhere. Station personell are too
busy. Emails with a small MP3 or WAV file is what can trigger a
response.

BM

For John Plimmer: MW QSL's?1
 

On Apr 27, 4:39*am, bm wrote:
On 26 Apr, 22:38, "Count Floyd"

wrote:
Hello John,
Having just gotten back into MW DXing, I was wondering, do the
stations, primarily in North America, still send out the old "card"
type QSL cards? *Last ones I had were from my high school days with
and old Hallicrafter's S-120!
Thanks,
Bob Grimes
--

- Extremely few do.
- Of the 250 latest NA AM veries I've received in the past
- 2-3 years, perhaps 3 or 4 were "old school" QSL cards.
- Most of the rest were emails, including a few with a Word file
- or JPG file attachment. Nowadays, addressing the Program
- Directors may be more rewarding than addressing the Chief
- Engineers. And you will need to accept verie texts like "yes,
- that's us" or similar instead of the traditional QSL text.
-
- Actually, writing a traditional reception report with program
- details etc is probably going to get you nowhere. Station
- personell are too busy. Emails with a small MP3 or WAV file
- is what can trigger a response.
-
- BM
-

BM - Good Insight and Info. ~ RHF

For John Plimmer: MW QSL's?1
 

Bart Bailey wrote:
In

posted on Sun, 27 Apr 2008 04:39:15 -0700 (PDT), bm wrote: Begin

Emails with a small MP3 or WAV file is what can trigger a
response.

Could it trigger an automatic deletion by their email screening
application because of it having an attachment?



Depends on the attachment size, but yes. If the attachment falls into
the range usually used to propagate viruses, the packet sniffer may send
it to another bot for examination. In many cases, though, it simply
deletes it from the system, regardless of file extension.

However, due to the threats by RIAA and some copyright holders, some
file extensions, mp3 and wav in particular, are targeted for deletion,
or at the very least examination, by a number of ISP's, and corporate
e-mail systems.

When I left CBS, mp3's didn't make it through the corporate servers.
Period. Audio content that was for legitimate use was FTP'd to the
corporate host. I understand this policy has been softened since.

My ATT account routinely inspects attachments into and out of my
account for copyright material. And some of my colleagues have trouble
getting through with any audio file.

My work account is a lot less restricted.

For John Plimmer: MW QSL's?1
 

On 1 Mai, 20:07, D Peter Maus wrote:
Bart Bailey wrote:
In

posted on Sun, 27 Apr 2008 04:39:15 -0700 (PDT), bm wrote: Begin

Emails with a small MP3 or WAV file is what can trigger a
response.

Could it trigger an automatic deletion by their email screening
application because of it having an attachment?

Depends on the attachment size, but yes. If the attachment falls into
the range usually used to propagate viruses, the packet sniffer may send
it to another bot for examination. In many cases, though, it simply
deletes it from the system, regardless of file extension.



You definitely have a point here, and I believe that an increasing
number of my reception reports are stopped although a very high
majority still slip through the barriers. An alternative approach
which I have tested with some success is to upload files to a server
such as box.net, and send the url to the addressee. But of course,
many are told never to click on unknown links...

BM

For John Plimmer: MW QSL's?1
 

D Peter Maus wrote:
Bart Bailey wrote:
In


posted on Sun, 27 Apr 2008 04:39:15 -0700 (PDT), bm wrote: Begin
Emails with a small MP3 or WAV file is what can trigger a
response.

Could it trigger an automatic deletion by their email screening
application because of it having an attachment?



Depends on the attachment size, but yes. If the attachment falls into
the range usually used to propagate viruses, the packet sniffer may send
it to another bot for examination. In many cases, though, it simply
deletes it from the system, regardless of file extension.

However, due to the threats by RIAA and some copyright holders, some
file extensions, mp3 and wav in particular, are targeted for deletion,
or at the very least examination, by a number of ISP's, and corporate
e-mail systems.

When I left CBS, mp3's didn't make it through the corporate servers.
Period. Audio content that was for legitimate use was FTP'd to the
corporate host. I understand this policy has been softened since.

My ATT account routinely inspects attachments into and out of my
account for copyright material. And some of my colleagues have trouble
getting through with any audio file.

My work account is a lot less restricted.

AT&T spies on everything you do.

For John Plimmer: MW QSL's?1
 

Bart Bailey wrote:
In

posted on Thu, 01 May 2008 18:07:50 GMT, D Peter Maus wrote: Begin

And some of my colleagues have trouble
getting through with any audio file.

rename the extension to [.dat] or better,
zip it first then rename
I exchange encrypted stuff easily enough if it's renamed [.bmp]

I wouldn't open that on a Windows machine. You'd have to be nuts.

For John Plimmer: MW QSL's?1
 

Bart Bailey wrote:
In posted on
Fri, 02 May 2008 06:01:49 -0700, dave wrote: Begin

You'd have to be nuts.

...or know what you're doing

???