- 1. [CQ-Contest] 10 Minute Rule (score: 1)
- Author: Albert Crespo <f5vhj@orange.fr>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 16:42:42 +0200 (CEST)
- In this day and age of spotting, maybe it is worth considering the issue of the ten minute rule being out of date and just abolishing it. It does not increase scores, but rather has the opposite effe
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-07/msg00229.html (7,400 bytes)
- 2. Re: [CQ-Contest] 10 Minute Rule (score: 1)
- Author: steve.root@culligan4water.com
- Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 15:51:33 +0000
- What is the difference between a properly equipped M/S WITHOUT a 10 minute rule and a Multi-2 ? The 10 minute rule is there for a reason. 73 Steve K0SR In this day and age of spotting, maybe it is wo
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-07/msg00236.html (7,945 bytes)
- 3. Re: [CQ-Contest] 10 Minute Rule (score: 1)
- Author: "Marijan Miletic" <s56a@bit.si>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 18:42:26 +0200
- Multiop in these days of abundant radios should differ in second TX being mults only (MS) or run everybody (M2). MM can run on all 6 bands as soon as sunspots appear. Log massaging seems to be popula
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-07/msg00241.html (7,028 bytes)
- 4. Re: [CQ-Contest] 10 Minute Rule (score: 1)
- Author: George Fremin III <geoiii@kkn.net>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 10:46:42 -0700
- I think the more correct statment would be without a 10 min band change rule or some other band change limit there is not much diffrence in hardware needed to compete in M/S or M/M. -- George Fremin
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-07/msg00243.html (7,447 bytes)
- 5. Re: [CQ-Contest] 10 Minute Rule (score: 1)
- Author: "Ed Muns" <w0yk@msn.com>
- Date: Tue, 28 Jul 2009 12:04:51 -0700
- One signal on the air at a time vs. two. Ed - W0YK _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-c
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-07/msg00244.html (7,408 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu