Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:VE5RA@sasktel.net: 197 ]

Total 197 documents matching your query.

41. Re: [CQ-Contest] Web Poll (Signal reports yes/no) (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Tue, 01 Apr 2008 07:35:07 -0600
You're right signal reports are subjective to a degree. If there are no true or false then why do we give signal reports out at all? What is the point? A 59 report, with or without a S meter, is supp
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00017.html (8,561 bytes)

42. Re: [CQ-Contest] Web Poll RS(T) Final Results (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Sat, 05 Apr 2008 17:12:59 -0600
This is going to make your face turn red and your typing fingers fly across the keyboard. IMO "I don't care" is a valid choice in any poll! Why bias the survey by making someone say only yes or no wh
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00122.html (8,214 bytes)

43. [CQ-Contest] More Cheating (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2008 11:39:37 -0600
Is cheating more common than anyone wishes to admit? Is it time to take a reality check and acknowledge that cheating is a big problem instead of down playing (head in sand) the possibility? Quote fr
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00252.html (7,224 bytes)

44. [CQ-Contest] More Cheating (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 07:35:53 -0600
There are always those who believe that by ignoring a problem, the problem will go away. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Part of the article was about cheating in a DX column, not about DXi
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00271.html (8,190 bytes)

45. [CQ-Contest] More Cheating (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 11:45:06 -0600
There are always those who believe that by ignoring a problem, the problem will go away. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Part of the article was about cheating in a DX column, not about DXi
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00282.html (8,161 bytes)

46. Re: [CQ-Contest] SKIMMER = BUMMER (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2008 20:01:39 -0600
Jim, You have a way of getting to the meat of the issue, and you are so correct in your assessment. The title of this debate should be called 'The rise and fall of cw contesting'. Skimmer is for lazy
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-04/msg00426.html (10,252 bytes)

47. Re: [CQ-Contest] This is Logic? - comment (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Wed, 11 Jun 2008 13:13:14 -0600
Bill, You are correct. If skimmer is allowed for unassisted, then by simple extension, packet is allowed for unassisted as I see it. Doug I don't really like any of these alternatives. Maybe I'll jus
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-06/msg00289.html (8,144 bytes)

48. Re: [CQ-Contest] Eliminate SO Unassisted? (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Fri, 13 Jun 2008 17:45:03 -0600
There appears to be a lot of people out there who do not have, nor want to train for, the operating skills others possess. Their thinking is to substitute technology for their laziness and/or lack of
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-06/msg00360.html (10,171 bytes)

49. Re: [CQ-Contest] Eliminate SO Unassisted? (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2008 19:59:28 -0600
It is great that each of us has a variety of skills and a variety of skill levels. However, because some of us are deficient in some of the human skills needed to become a top cw contester, does not
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-06/msg00391.html (10,874 bytes)

50. Re: [CQ-Contest] Eliminate SO Unassisted? (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2008 19:59:28 -0600
You do not need cw skills to get a licence any longer. However, this DOES NOT prevent you from acquiring cw skills. If you wish to enter a cw contest, train yourself in cw, regardless of what you did
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-06/msg00392.html (9,483 bytes)

51. Re: [CQ-Contest] European sigs to W9 (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2008 18:48:27 -0600
This contest was one blast here in Saskatchewan on 160m. Never in my life have I seen 160m emulate 20m especially the first day ... DX everywhere and I wasn't competing in this contest. Doug "Those I
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-10/msg00236.html (8,822 bytes)

52. Re: [CQ-Contest] European sigs to W9 (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 08:09:51 -0600
I heard you calling. I believe the local EU QRM was unbelievably strong. If the EU station did not have directional receiving antennas, it would be difficult for them to hear NA. A lot of east coast
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-10/msg00245.html (8,036 bytes)

53. Re: [CQ-Contest] Rising IQ This Year (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2008 12:33:18 -0600
IMO the control of the pileup is with the 'DX' station. A good operator can maintain charge; for example someone like Nigel on cw. I find it is easier to control the pile on phone because verbal is u
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-12/msg00193.html (9,828 bytes)

54. Re: [CQ-Contest] Rising IQ This Year (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Sat, 06 Dec 2008 18:19:53 -0600
Here is my take on this. In a huge pileup when the DX station comes back with say DL4 ?. How many symbols do the caller's hear, excluding the tail enders? For myself when the symbol '?', dit dit dah
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-12/msg00201.html (10,362 bytes)

55. Re: [CQ-Contest] cqww cw spotting report (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2008 11:23:03 -0600
Geesh, remember that contesting is just a hobby, repeat just a hobby. There are so many more important issues in the world to deal with. Can't we focus our efforts on them instead. Doug --Original Me
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-12/msg00251.html (13,700 bytes)

56. Re: [CQ-Contest] self help during contest (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2008 20:05:26 -0600
The hell with the funnel. Just cut the top of the milk jug so it fits. Doug Life is not a spectator sport. --Original Message-- Denny, I'm with you on this one but so you don't lose any score and ...
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-12/msg00266.html (7,671 bytes)

57. Re: [CQ-Contest] The dupes? (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 12:08:13 -0600
On phone, I give them the exchange, then I tell them that they are a dup, and I add that they are in the log again. Quite often they copy my callsign as VE5 instead of the correct VA5. Doug Life is n
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-12/msg00376.html (9,036 bytes)

58. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW CW & 6Y1V Logs (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 11:14:28 -0600
The right to not submit your log is yours ... your reason(s) are flimsy. You participate in a public event and yet you don't wish to have a 'video' of this event replayed publicly. It doesn't make se
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-01/msg00289.html (8,805 bytes)

59. Re: [CQ-Contest] [Re: CQWW CW & 6Y1V Logs] (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 13:46:24 -0600
As soon as I read the opening paragraph my 'bull shit detector' started flashing. I sensed that the rest of the posting would be suspect as if possibly concocted by one team member, who in my opinion
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-01/msg00312.html (11,006 bytes)

60. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 10:50:23 -0600
You obviously have an axe-to-grind and you are demonstrating, taking your frustrations out on the HOBBY of contesting. You have it totally backwards - I feel sorry for you, not you for me. If you wan
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00174.html (12,010 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu