- 21. Re: [CQ-Contest] AN OPEN LETTER TO THE CQ CONTEST COMMITTEE (score: 1)
- Author: "Kerr, Prof. K.M." <k.kerr@abdn.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2010 08:30:29 +0000
- Good morning, This is a well rehearsed debate but the issues keep coming up and for those of us who are concerned about the potential changes to our hobby, it is difficult not to comment. I am with B
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-01/msg00255.html (14,822 bytes)
- 22. Re: [CQ-Contest] Do I need to operate assisted to figure out the calls? (score: 1)
- Author: "Kerr, Prof. K.M." <k.kerr@abdn.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 30 Jul 2012 17:47:23 +0100
- I agree with the sentiments expressed in this thread. I thought the general operating 'standard' in this event was really bad (but then I may not be guiltless either), both from what I would expect f
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-07/msg00381.html (14,295 bytes)
- 23. Re: [CQ-Contest] Non-assisted & Assisted (score: 1)
- Author: "Kerr, Prof. K.M." <k.kerr@abdn.ac.uk>
- Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2013 16:30:02 +0000
- Randy, I'd like to believe that you mean 'embracing' the new technology means adopting SO(A) categories into contests. This surely means Assistance is already accepted, if that is how you want to ope
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-01/msg00253.html (20,905 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu