Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:ve4xt@mts.net: 348 ]

Total 348 documents matching your query.

121. Re: [CQ-Contest] QRP (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2006 22:42:14 -0500
First: signing /QRP should be grounds for a DQ, as far as I'm concerned. It's not a legitimate part of your callsign and if you think I'm going to waste another nanosecond working you after you've sc
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00127.html (9,004 bytes)

122. Re: [CQ-Contest] "?" not equal to "QRL?" (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 08:26:33 -0500
This is an excellent point, and one that serves to remind us that even during a contest, contesters don't own the band. Casual ops are more prone than we to not understanding the scope of what's at
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00133.html (9,514 bytes)

123. Re: [CQ-Contest] "?" not equal to "QRL?" (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2006 10:43:05 -0500
To me, that's akin to saying there's no time for operating properly, and I just don't believe that's the case. There are dozens of ways even top-performing stations 'lose' a few seconds here or ther
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00156.html (10,529 bytes)

124. Re: [CQ-Contest] Radio as Carry-On Luggage? (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2006 08:22:39 -0500
Hi Dennis, I really, REALLY hope you meant to say 'swab for explosives'! ;=\ Dennis Ashworth said... _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00254.html (8,679 bytes)

125. [CQ-Contest] ft1kd vs ft1kmp (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Sat, 19 Aug 2006 21:20:58 -0500
Hi all, I see that the Ft1000d is now, on average, a couple hun more than a used FT1kMP. Just out of curiosity, what does the collective wisdom say about the differences between rigs for contesting.
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00296.html (6,846 bytes)

126. Re: [CQ-Contest] WRTC Spot/Log Correlation (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 21:22:31 -0500
K4BEV hilariously postulated: ...and then asked.... The rules for non-amateur means of communication refer to soliciting contacts, in other words, IMing, telephoning, e-mailing or carrier-pigeoning y
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00059.html (9,650 bytes)

127. Re: [CQ-Contest] A New Perspective [was:WRTC Spot/Log Correlation] (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 20:58:46 -0500
My problem with Ev's suggestion is it seems to operate from the premise that contests are merely about everybody trying to climb to the top of one very large mountain. Since many contests place a goo
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00098.html (12,890 bytes)

128. Re: [CQ-Contest] A New Perspective [was:WRTC Spot/Log Correlation] (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 22:25:42 -0500
I still do not understand how this creates any kind of meaningful competitive endeavour. A home builders group in Winnipeg runs a Parade of Homes twice a year where builders enter their houses into c
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00111.html (11,931 bytes)

129. Re: [CQ-Contest] A New Perspective [was:WRTC Spot/Log Correlation] (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2006 15:00:53 -0500
Syl, Syl, Syl, That's why you have competitions based on geography. I can easily look at the ARRL regional boxes and see how I did compared to others in this division. I can look at the results for M
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00119.html (12,996 bytes)

130. Re: [CQ-Contest] CW Accuracy (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2006 07:55:53 -0500
Like Barry said, Morse Runner is the only program you need to know. It trains you on the full gamut of CW skills: pileups, lids, QRN, QRM, QSB, RIT, high-speed, low-speed -- and of course, typing! I
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00173.html (9,277 bytes)

131. Re: [CQ-Contest] Sending Speed (score: 1)
Author: <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Thu, 14 Sep 2006 17:09:52 -0500
One thing that I noticed from the last sprint was that more stations seemed to be waiting for a confirmation from the departing op before pouncing on the one taking over the frequency. That saved me
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00219.html (8,638 bytes)

132. Re: [CQ-Contest] Defining CQ's Operating Time (score: 1)
Author: <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Fri, 22 Sep 2006 9:24:33 -0500
Many contests specify "listening time counts as operating time." Certainly, any transmitting done in an attempt to score contacts also counts as operating time. The main reason that listening rule ex
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-09/msg00334.html (12,063 bytes)

133. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting Extinction (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Thu, 5 Oct 2006 02:55:00 -0500
Seems to me a relatively easy way to answer the question is to look not at log submissions but at the overall number of individual callsigns, net of uniques, appearing in the combined aggregate of al
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-10/msg00055.html (9,794 bytes)

134. Re: [CQ-Contest] Contesting Extinction (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2006 09:25:06 -0500
Randy, K5ZD: My experience is that you can't make them enjoy contesting, but you can get smaller This, to me, seems to be the answer to all the kvetching about giving the little guy a sandbox to play
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-10/msg00105.html (11,032 bytes)

135. Re: [CQ-Contest] Rare Canadian mults (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 19:10:37 -0500
As a VE4, I can honestly say the answer to working VE4 is small, unmarked bills. Lots of them. ;') Seriously, however, as a VE4 who is often on in modest to serious efforts, I will often find a spot
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-10/msg00292.html (11,117 bytes)

136. Re: [CQ-Contest] real time scoreboards (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 07:47:42 -0500
As much as I am ambivalent on the issue of real-time scoreboards, perhaps someone could enlighten me: How does a real-time scoreboard provide an unfair advantage? Or, how does it provide any more of
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-10/msg00460.html (15,361 bytes)

137. Re: [CQ-Contest] Distanced-Based Contest Concept (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 08:02:31 -0500
I like the idea of distance-based scoring (why do two stations who can see each other across the Strait of Gibralter get to count their Q at, what, four times the amount that a station in Nfld can cl
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-10/msg00463.html (9,415 bytes)

138. Re: [CQ-Contest] real time scoreboards (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Sun, 22 Oct 2006 08:16:20 -0500
Gee, it seems to me that single ops who wish to win should ENCOURAGE packet cheating. Packet is obviously a drawback, not an advantage. I think there are enough examples here that we can let the "I l
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-10/msg00464.html (13,753 bytes)

139. Re: [CQ-Contest] Distanced-Based Contest Concept (score: 1)
Author: "Kelly Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2006 04:33:38 -0500
Good points, all, and I certainly didn't intend to support the idea of messing up existing contests. For a new contest, however, I think it's something to consider, all of your points notwithstanding
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-10/msg00499.html (12,196 bytes)

140. Re: [CQ-Contest] zero pointers (score: 1)
Author: <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 14:59:56 -0600
I would encourage people to look beyond CQ WW on this issue. For example, what if 5 of those zero pointers were ID, ND, SD, AK and WY? You erase them from memory this time and they may erase you from
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-10/msg00659.html (10,332 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu