Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:mjc5@psu.edu: 253 ]

Total 253 documents matching your query.

241. Re: [CQ-Contest] WAEDC CW: only for Extra class USA (score: 1)
Author: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 08:45:16 -0400
ahem..... Is that really what you want to do? I do trust that you are not serious about the idea of ignoring every rule you don't like. Talk about anarchy. -73 de Mike N3LI - ________________________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-07/msg00312.html (10,137 bytes)

242. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self spotting rationale (score: 1)
Author: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 08:59:52 -0400
Yes, I was wrong on that one. Sorry about that, and thanks for all the corrections, folks. Perhaps in my garbled Ham radio history, my real point was missed. That is "Don't launch a homebrewed DOS at
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-07/msg00317.html (10,242 bytes)

243. Re: [CQ-Contest] Swimming and Skimming (score: 1)
Author: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 10:18:46 -0400
I think it is obvious that competitive swimming should be done "al fresco". Eliminates arguments over who's suit is doing what, and would probably increase television viewership.... ;^) I just wish t
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00039.html (8,040 bytes)

244. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
Date: Mon, 03 Aug 2009 16:55:06 -0400
What is this "time slicing" concept? -73 de Mike N3LI - _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00043.html (9,711 bytes)

245. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 2009 13:47:36 -0400
After being brought up to speed on time slicing, I would have to say the duck principle is in effect. To any one who is listening to the multi-single station that is using time slicing, there would b
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00062.html (10,768 bytes)

246. Re: [CQ-Contest] Vista OS (score: 1)
Author: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
Date: Fri, 07 Aug 2009 14:12:26 -0400
Vista will be an interesting experience - I would wait until Windows 7 is out. This isn't an endorsement of W7, though if you have a choice, get a machine that can be upgraded to XP. If you get a Vis
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00109.html (8,055 bytes)

247. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 10:39:46 -0400
I had to go to the pdf, Hans, I thought you were pulling our collective leg. Sadly, you were not. My thoughts: 1. These is one badly in need of a rewrite for sure. There was someone who mentioned fol
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00144.html (10,827 bytes)

248. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 09:02:03 -0400
Humor alert! I was just hit by a brainstorm. A new contest: The World Ham Cheatathlon! There are only two classes: QRP and Single Op Low power. The catch is that no one is allowed to run QRP or low p
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00157.html (10,427 bytes)

249. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2009 13:59:25 -0400
When there is no functional difference between a M/M station and a M/S station, the distinction is obviously artificial. Well, you make a point that is worth addressing. It's possible that since the
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00162.html (9,712 bytes)

250. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: Mike Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 2009 22:57:26 -0400
If we adopt the semi pro outlook you note for contesting, we might give serious consideration to just hangin' it up. Yes, there are stations that have an amazing amount of effort and money put into t
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00170.html (9,497 bytes)

251. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 09:21:59 -0400
See that's the weird thing. People are caught cheating. They are DQ'ed. The system works. So what do we do? In our reactionary dudgeon, we add some more rules, when in fact the old ones worked. Okay,
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00183.html (10,092 bytes)

252. Re: [CQ-Contest] Station Inspections (score: 1)
Author: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 09:41:25 -0400
There's a reason for that. Most all Hams don't cheat. I'll bet it was great fun looking at all the FD radio stations. -73 de Mike N3LI - _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mai
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00185.html (10,081 bytes)

253. Re: [CQ-Contest] Why the 10 min rule anyway? (score: 1)
Author: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 11:13:04 -0400
Let us use a 2 transmitter setup for simplicity sake Imagine if you will, a method to lock out one transmitter while another is in use. Now imagine this lockout operating very quickly. One transmitte
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-08/msg00190.html (9,279 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu