- 41. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
- Author: "K0HB" <kzerohb@gmail.com>
- Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 18:31:41 -0600
- Good plan. Trust the log checkers. That's been my plan all along. It's their job to thoroughly, exhaustively, and fairly judge the contest. 73, de Hans, K0HB/W7 ______________________________________
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00162.html (9,932 bytes)
- 42. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
- Author: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
- Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 21:22:37 -0500
- It's nice that Mike "suspects" that there are good reasons for open logs to exist. I'm with Hans on this one... I'd like to know what they are. And while that may not matter for a contest who's spons
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00167.html (11,273 bytes)
- 43. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
- Author: "Robert Naumann" <w5ov@w5ov.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 07:05:05 -0600
- Why is it so difficult to see that having the logs open makes it very clear that the log checking process is transparent and completely without bias or favoritism? I think it's about time to proclaim
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00170.html (9,559 bytes)
- 44. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
- Author: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 10:33:05 -0500
- This is a good place to jump in with what I see as the essence of the issue. We get many points of view, but in the end, it boils down to that those who are very interested in open and published logs
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00171.html (15,043 bytes)
- 45. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
- Author: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 07:55:44 -0700
- We might as well give those that might be inclined to cheat a complete detail of exactly what the log checkers do to catch those that are not on the up and up. Yeah that makes great sense. What we do
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00172.html (12,404 bytes)
- 46. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
- Author: Doug Renwick <ve5ra@sasktel.net>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 10:50:23 -0600
- You obviously have an axe-to-grind and you are demonstrating, taking your frustrations out on the HOBBY of contesting. You have it totally backwards - I feel sorry for you, not you for me. If you wan
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00174.html (12,010 bytes)
- 47. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
- Author: "David Kopacz" <david.kopacz@aspwebhosting.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 11:45:43 -0600
- Mike, Let's examine your statements. "So far I have yet to hear one compelling argument why logs should not be open. Because I don't like it doesn't fly in my book." Quite simply, they are MY logs. T
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00175.html (12,518 bytes)
- 48. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
- Author: "David Kopacz" <david.kopacz@aspwebhosting.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 13:15:54 -0600
- No, I have not dismissed Dave's analogy. The RECORD of a QSO belongs to both parties in the QSO, but the record of what I did next, is mine and mine only. You fail to see the significance of individu
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00176.html (17,709 bytes)
- 49. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
- Author: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 11:40:39 -0700
- "So far I have yet to hear one compelling argument why logs should not be open. Because I don't like it doesn't fly in my book." Quite simply, they are MY logs. The information contained within them
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00177.html (14,668 bytes)
- 50. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
- Author: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:19:58 -0700
- I am curious. Would the logs have been submitted if you had won? I checked the 3830 archives and there is no posting for the CQWW 2008 CW effort. Just curious why? 3830 has nothing to do with CQ and
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00178.html (15,284 bytes)
- 51. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
- Author: "David Kopacz" <david.kopacz@aspwebhosting.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 16:19:19 -0600
- Please explain transparent, in detail....because the meaning is completely transparent to me. David ~ KY1V Why is it so difficult to see that having the logs open makes it very clear that the log che
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00179.html (10,493 bytes)
- 52. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
- Author: "K0HB" <kzerohb@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 21:32:16 -0600
- Neither is Radiosport contesting. 73, de Hans, K0HB/W7 _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/c
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00184.html (9,374 bytes)
- 53. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
- Author: Zack Widup <w9sz.zack@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 08:41:53 -0600
- Then why do I get so many SWL cards every year for QSO's I made in the ARRL DX contest? (Sorry, I couldn't resist!) 73, Zack W9SZ _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing li
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00194.html (9,868 bytes)
- 54. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
- Author: "Tom Osborne" <w7why@verizon.net>
- Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 17:42:14 -0800
- Hi Hans Yes, it is, if you are putting your score on getscores.org. Everybody can see what you are doing. 73 Tom W7WHY _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Conte
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00205.html (9,369 bytes)
- 55. [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
- Author: "David Kopacz" <david.kopacz@aspwebhosting.com>
- Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 23:13:56 -0600
- Not exactly, they can only see the "RESULTS" of what you are doing. Kind of like a closed log! David ~ KY1V Hi Hans Yes, it is, if you are putting your score on getscores.org. Everybody can see what
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00208.html (7,307 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu