Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:BPARRY@RGV.RR.COM: 171 ]

Total 171 documents matching your query.

101. Re: [CQ-Contest] DC and NAQP (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Aug 2012 16:53:08 -0500
The way I understand it, Texas has the right to divide into 5 separate states if it wants to. I think that it would be great if a line were drawn south of San Antonio and we could call it the Commonw
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-08/msg00250.html (14,056 bytes)

102. Re: [CQ-Contest] Cheating as a moral issue (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2012 08:20:49 -0500
Frankly I am really tired of this topic. The idea that cheaters are hiding behind every tree is not something that I want to talk about. This seems to be the favorite topic of a very small highly sel
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-09/msg00115.html (10,681 bytes)

103. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ Contest Certificates. (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2012 10:35:03 -0600
I agree with Pete. I think that you could allow us to print out the certificates on line and it would be just fine. Send out the plaques. Bill W5VX I'm not sure I agree with Randy on this. If I could
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-11/msg00170.html (14,999 bytes)

104. Re: [CQ-Contest] LotW Status 2012-12-10 (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Dec 2012 14:46:44 -0600
I understand your thought in making this suggestion BUT... One of my main objectives in using LOTW is to reduce the number of paper QSLs that I get. I get lots of guys that want a card for every QSO
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-12/msg00107.html (10,329 bytes)

105. Re: [CQ-Contest] LOTW and Contest Logs (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2012 15:06:36 -0600
To upload logs to LOTW the QSOs need to be verified. Foreign stations need to submit verification of their license before they can get their log accepted. I have no problem with the concept but it wo
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-12/msg00117.html (8,883 bytes)

106. [CQ-Contest] Diodes (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2013 13:45:57 -0600
My brother called a little while ago and said that he was having to construct a diode tree and the schematic called for 4 - 6 amp diodes 1R60s4 or equivalent. He was asking me where to get them. I ch
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-01/msg00028.html (6,519 bytes)

107. [CQ-Contest] LOTW (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 12 Jan 2013 23:06:11 -0600
After all the negative comments about LOTW (I didn't say anything but I was irritated too), I think it is only fair to comment that the staff has the system running pretty well as of today. At one ti
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-01/msg00075.html (7,007 bytes)

108. [CQ-Contest] CQWWDX CW (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2013 09:39:12 -0600
I was setting up my calendar for next this year and I believe that this is one of those years that the CQWWDX CW Contest is on the weekend BEFORE Thanksgiving. (The last FULL weekend in November is t
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-01/msg00135.html (7,295 bytes)

109. Re: [CQ-Contest] Real-time Radiosport (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Sun, 10 Mar 2013 14:06:11 -0500
I usually agree with Ward on most things but I don't think that online logging is a good thing. I work contests because I like to work contests. I like working lots of countries, I like seeing how fa
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00235.html (15,311 bytes)

110. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW CW 2012 Log Checking Reports (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Apr 2013 11:30:19 -0500
Thanks Randy, As usual I am more exotic to some than others. The usual contingent of stations that worked us as WH4X instead of W5VX...they even got my zone as 31 too! :-) Bill W5VX The final log che
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-04/msg00166.html (8,683 bytes)

111. Re: [CQ-Contest] Field Day Rules Change(s) (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 18 May 2013 10:06:15 -0500
I guess that since I have gotten old things like this just don't bother me anymore. I operate contests (not sure if field day is even one) for fun and so do my friends. I am not likely to "compete fo
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-05/msg00173.html (11,521 bytes)

112. Re: [CQ-Contest] recruiting yourth methods (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 25 May 2013 09:09:57 -0500
I have spent about 45 years working with Jr. Hi and High school kids. Part of that time, I taught Physics at three different high schools. You'd think that I would have a pretty good insight about wh
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-05/msg00241.html (10,628 bytes)

113. Re: [CQ-Contest] When is speed not speedy? (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 31 May 2013 16:42:15 -0500
This is an interesting thread. I have long noticed that different conditions/ running vs S&P etc require me to vary the speed that I send. When CQing I notice that if I stop getting replies, I start
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-06/msg00003.html (11,508 bytes)

114. [CQ-Contest] WARC bands and contesting. (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 09:44:48 -0500
I have been thinking that we have made a mistake in not allowing contesting on the WARC bands. These bands are real nice but there doesn't seem to be much activity. If we were to have a WARC band con
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-08/msg00015.html (6,863 bytes)

115. Re: [CQ-Contest] making $$$ on QSLs (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2013 08:59:43 -0500
This is very interesting Charles. I have spent some time trying to maximize my efficiency in QSLing and you seem to have done a great job. I have received cards from you and I really appreciate getti
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-08/msg00192.html (9,575 bytes)

116. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why did I not get a card back? (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2013 15:25:28 -0500
Charles, I agree with your post almost completely. The number of "bad apples" are few. However we were talking about the bad apples. My return rate on QSLs is very high and I sincerely appreciate all
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-09/msg00022.html (9,367 bytes)

117. Re: [CQ-Contest] How to Confirm a QSO (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2013 16:47:38 -0500
I don't operate phone contests but my way of responding that I get the exchange is "TU W5VX". If someone repeats something back to me - that signals me that something has not been copied right. Bill
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-09/msg00023.html (11,607 bytes)

118. [CQ-Contest] Sorry (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2013 14:40:23 -0500
I had a phone call a few minutes ago and the fellow asked if I was operating the TQP contest. I said I had been on earlier this morning but had stopped for lunch. He said that someone was using my ca
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-09/msg00217.html (6,978 bytes)

119. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQ WW Scoring System needs revision? (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 22:42:24 -0600
Dave, The reason that it never gains traction is that the ones who like change talk about it after every CQWW contest and the ones that don't see any need to continually discuss the issue since the c
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00489.html (12,698 bytes)

120. Re: [CQ-Contest] What rig to choose for a one-time fieldday MM setup? (score: 1)
Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>
Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 18:41:14 -0600
If you are looking for an easy interface And low price, try and find a TS850. This is an excellent radio and simple to use...if you can find a good one. We used several at 6D2X for years and they are
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00512.html (13,161 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu