Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:richnn3w@verizon.net: 199 ]

Total 199 documents matching your query.

61. Re: [CQ-Contest] BOGUS QSO RATES! (score: 1)
Author: "Richard DiDonna NN3W" <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 07:05:13 -0500
The Commission has stated that the purpose of the rule is to ensure that pertinent information concerning the identity of a station is know. According to the FCC in its proceeding In The Matter of Ch
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-11/msg00117.html (16,846 bytes)

62. Re: [CQ-Contest] Two Reasons Why Assisted and Unassisted Should Be Merged (score: 1)
Author: "Richard DiDonna NN3W" <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Thu, 01 Dec 2011 08:27:02 -0500
Ummmm....you apparently forgot to look at the SOAB HP and SOAB HP(A) in USA claimed scores for CQWW SSB. Having won both (U) and (A) in the past, I can say with absolute metaphysical certainty that t
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-12/msg00013.html (11,306 bytes)

63. Re: [CQ-Contest] Big jump in qrz.com lookups after 10m contest (score: 1)
Author: "Richard DiDonna NN3W" <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 12:33:08 -0500
Casual operators often use casual logging software which has an auto qrz.com lookup. "hit" counts used to exceed 500 or 600 in a big contest weekend until QRZ.com disabled certain features and allowe
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2011-12/msg00178.html (9,326 bytes)

64. Re: [CQ-Contest] Run rates back in the day (score: 1)
Author: Richard F DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2012 13:38:09 -0600 (CST)
Interestingly, if you go back to 1989 - when packet was in its infancy and was NOT really used in the domestic environment, the SSB scores were as high as they are today! W7WA won the 1989 SS Phone l
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-02/msg00254.html (11,154 bytes)

65. Re: [CQ-Contest] Is QSL Bureau pertinent in today HAM Radio (score: 1)
Author: "Richard DiDonna NN3W" <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 21:14:36 -0400
I had posted a response earlier in this topic, but for some reason it was never cleared through. I strongly have to disagree with N2MM's position on QSLing. As contesters, we go through a lot to make
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-03/msg00228.html (13,532 bytes)

66. [CQ-Contest] RDXC submission errors (score: 1)
Author: Richard F DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2012 21:07:23 -0500 (CDT)
I am having one hell of a time trying to submit a RDXC log. I have tried to upload -3- different times and get the same error. -- Next mistakes were found in contest log of NN3W: Column 2 must contai
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-03/msg00273.html (6,901 bytes)

67. [CQ-Contest] Warning re: Dayton "Grand" Hotel (formerly the DoubleTree Dayton) (score: 1)
Author: "Richard DiDonna NN3W" <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Sat, 07 Apr 2012 12:10:10 -0400
Just a FYI: for those of you heading to Hamvention this year and were booked at the hotel that was formerly a DoubleTree by Hilton property (Doubletree Dayton), please take a moment to read the recen
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-04/msg00074.html (7,161 bytes)

68. Re: [CQ-Contest] Remote Control in Contests (score: 1)
Author: Richard F DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 11:15:08 -0500 (CDT)
A little clarification.....AFAIK, in the 2011 SS, there was not a single highly motivated op ("HMO") that did the station rotation routine. perhaps back in 2009 or 2008, but not recently. And the num
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-04/msg00239.html (10,599 bytes)

69. Re: [CQ-Contest] News #11 - WRTC2014 Competition Rules Released for Review (score: 1)
Author: Richard DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2012 09:57:27 -0400
I realize that this should ideally be directed at the WRTC committee via the comment solicitation mechanism, but is anyone else bothered with the proposed rule change? WRTC has now gone from a skills
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-05/msg00111.html (10,509 bytes)

70. Re: [CQ-Contest] KP2MM Disqualified in ARRL CW 2012 (score: 1)
Author: Richard DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Sat, 23 Jun 2012 13:43:14 -0400
Depends on the circumstances, you cant simply change a single op to a multi-op entry. Rules differences are such that a competitive single op would be disqualified from multi-single or have substanti
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-06/msg00253.html (13,943 bytes)

71. Re: [CQ-Contest] A smoking gun? (was RE: KP2MM Disqualified in ARRL CW 2012) (score: 1)
Author: Richard DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2012 16:34:16 -0400
You're forgetting that you both are of the same license class. Not the same case here. 73 Rich NN3W _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com h
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-06/msg00316.html (9,845 bytes)

72. Re: [CQ-Contest] Single-Op Assisted beats single-op (score: 1)
Author: Richard DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2012 23:58:06 -0400
Yes, its happened several times. 73 Rich NN3W _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-07/msg00133.html (7,600 bytes)

73. Re: [CQ-Contest] Log Submission Times (score: 1)
Author: Richard DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 09:05:07 -0400
I agree that technology has facilitated the ease at which logs can be sent in. However, comparing the reporting of trading blocks and contest logs are not quite the same. Trading implies computer dir
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-07/msg00297.html (8,608 bytes)

74. [CQ-Contest] CQWW UBNs (score: 1)
Author: Richard DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Sun, 29 Jul 2012 22:54:30 -0400
Looks like they're up....we'll have to wait for passwords. 73 Rich NN3W _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/m
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-07/msg00369.html (6,354 bytes)

75. Re: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: [N1MM] New RAC (ARRL contest) sections (score: 1)
Author: Richard DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2012 10:35:23 -0400
Well, the multipliers are ARRL Sections, RAC sections and the what ARRL effectively concedes to be a big "glop" 5.2. Multiplier: Each ARRL Section and RAC Section plus the Canadian NT (Northern Terri
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-08/msg00086.html (10,042 bytes)

76. Re: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: [N1MM] New RAC (ARRL contest) sections (score: 1)
Author: Richard DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2012 22:51:26 -0400
I ran my log from last year against the maps from the new Ontario sections and found that I worked at least 3 stations in each section. I'll also add that the addition of new sections/new multipliers
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-08/msg00096.html (12,288 bytes)

77. Re: [CQ-Contest] Fwd: New RAC (ARRL contest) sections (score: 1)
Author: Richard DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 10:16:55 -0400
Here's my tally from the Sweeps SSB side... Total worked from ON: 25 ONS: 9 GTA: 8 ONE: 5 ONN 3 The first ONN I worked was at 2253z Saturday and he gave me #19; the second one worked worked was at 02
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-08/msg00105.html (14,930 bytes)

78. Re: [CQ-Contest] DC and NAQP (score: 1)
Author: Richard DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 22:47:25 -0400
I think a LOT of the debate here gets mired in politics - which is unfortunate. DC is a unique city. Its not a state. Its not a province. Its not part of Maryland, or Virginia. Nor will it ever be. N
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-08/msg00139.html (11,629 bytes)

79. Re: [CQ-Contest] DC and NAQP (score: 1)
Author: Richard DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2012 15:57:25 -0400
Are you really being that obtuse? More multipliers, more QSOs, more challenge, more activity. 73 Rich NN3W _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contestin
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-08/msg00154.html (9,587 bytes)

80. Re: [CQ-Contest] [wrtc2014] WRTC Category Weighting Factor (score: 1)
Author: Richard DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Thu, 23 Aug 2012 10:29:51 -0400
Without commenting on the abilities of any operators, I'll note that a team of operators from WRTC 2010 who operates exclusively in the LP category did not finish in the Top Ten of all teams. 73 Rich
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-08/msg00276.html (9,886 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu