Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Dead\s+horse\:\s+CQ\s+WW\s+rules\s+apparently\s+prohibit\s+CW\s+Skimmer\s+use\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Dead\s+horse\:\s+CQ\s+WW\s+rules\s+apparently\s+prohibit\s+CW\s+Skimmer\s+use\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Dead horse: CQ WW rules apparently prohibit CW Skimmer use (score: 1): Author: Scott Robbins <w4pa@yahoo.com>; Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 06:40:46 -0700 (PDT); It does not refer to that at all in the CQ WW rules. The rules say (verbatim): "The use of DX alerting assistance of any kind places the station in the Single Operator Assisted category." It doesn't; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00317.html (8,947 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Dead horse: CQ WW rules apparently prohibit CW Skimmer use (score: 1): Author: "Alfred Frugoli" <alfred.frugoli@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 10:57:50 -0400; The problem with this whole discussion is that the "dead horse" becomes very alive when you talk about enforcement. I'm 'relatively' new to contesting (15 years or so). From my perspective, the honor; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00321.html (11,640 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Dead horse: CQ WW rules apparently prohibit CW Skimmer use (score: 1): Author: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>; Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 17:34:04 -0400; I was referring to how we commonly refer to the "assisted" category, not the letter of the rules of one or more particular contests. And if we're really going to split hairs between "packet cluster o; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-03/msg00337.html (11,930 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]