And I should have added my contesting motto: "Tune for maximum fun." 73, Art, K3KU _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.conte
N7ZG asked "During SS, where do the rare Canadian mults hang out and at what time?" As a certified SS CW (I say again, CW) Little Pistol, I've thought about that for MANY years. Back around 1967 I as
"As a VE4, I can honestly say the answer to working VE4 is small, unmarked bills. Lots of them. ;') " -- You bet!!! US or Canadian?? Art K3KU _______________________________________________ CQ-Contes
VO1MX and VE3DZ mentioned that poor enunciation makes it hard to copy your Section -- especially if the receiving op is not familiar with the the info. This brings me back to my Little Pistol questio
I tried to send this back on August 7, when there was a discusssion of "SO2R Technique" on the Reflector. My original never appeared (I think the site had a glitch about then), so I'm trying again. S
K7QQ asked "If I ask someone during a QSO if they have heard a NE station I don't consider it assisted if they say yes they are on 14.296.00345 ... IS Quack outta Line ???" With all respect, Rex, I t
A few thoughts on this thread. 0. I'm assuming that we are working with the rules as-is. Changing the rules is a different discussion. 1. 1600 does seem like a lot of QSOs. I'll have to see what frac
Don't know if there will be a story #2. I few years ago, when I got active again after a long absence, I remarked that one of the differences in SS was that everybody now has the same call sign. Here
In CQ WW SSB I was fooling around ("but I repeat myself") on 15M. I figured to work a few loud guys, just to make sure the radio still played on SSB so I would be ready to work SS fone. I was logging
Somebody replied privately: "0X3 is a 0 penalty plus 0 points for the lost QSO.. However, if you were the only US or zone 5 or whatever your friend logged he will lose the multiplier/multipliers. "CQ
Just a recap, mostly for those with Checks later than mid-'70s or who never did traffic handling. The SS exchange is an analogy of the "official" ARRL message header. In the earliest SS contests (193
I have been ignoring this thread, but I noticed one of K5ZD's points (I think he was addressing somebody's concern that listeners could be cheating): "... it appears most of the guys who listen to th
"So I don't say this to contradict anything Ron's saying, because he's right, there are contests which have rules prohibiting this practice. "My question is why? "Whose interests are protected by thi
N6TJ said: "Simply asked: why send more than required to get the message across?" Indeed: "... to get the message across...." Well we knew that even before Claude Shannon explained it. So it works OK
Reasonable people may disagree, but I vote "no" -- you are no longer unassisted. I think that before packet, MAYBE more people would have said yes. I think we're getting a little stricter, and I thin
K0HB replies to N5OT, saying: "And here I thought we were all trying to "do our best" -- silly me!" Well, no. People have all sorts of different motivations. Some are out to maximize their fun. Some
(Note that I have, again, changed the subject when the thread branches -- or should I say "frays"?) Rex asks about the case where he mis-entered the QSO data, and could not get it fixed. 1. Should I
NS3T is a really good guy and a good op, so I was surprised to see him start the thread about combining the two entry classes. I would keep them separate -- having other people find the QSOs for you
Plenty has been said about Packet's having taken away the challenge (and thereby discounted the skills) of finding new ones, whether it's new mul'ts or new QSOs in a Test, or just new "entities" for
Some responders missed the cultural reference there. The subject line was a joke, guys. I wrote it as a play on common old geezer* phrases, such as: "Roosevelt ruined the country." "The designated hi