Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Encouraging\s+contest\s+participation\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [CQ-Contest] Encouraging contest participation (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Jun 2009 18:01:00 -0700
I had made some comments directly to Randy in response to his request for inputs that might make contesting more interesting or encourage more participation. He suggested I repost them to the reflect
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-06/msg00244.html (10,412 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Encouraging contest participation (score: 1)
Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:16:51 -0400
Dave's right about the potential value of encouraging more casual participants. Just as happened to me 54 years ago, participation for purposes other than winning a certificate will result in some pe
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-06/msg00268.html (8,332 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Encouraging contest participation (score: 1)
Author: "K0HB" <kzerohb@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 09:58:40 -0800
No all that long ago (but in the paper-log era) ARRL did grant DXCC credit for contacts in cross-checked logs. Don't know why the practice was stopped, perhaps workload (?). It would take some non-t
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-06/msg00271.html (8,483 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Encouraging contest participation (score: 1)
Author: Julius Fazekas <phriendly1@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 07:03:28 -0700 (PDT)
I do remember this from the ARRL DX. It was a major reason, back in the day, for me playing in it. I did, for some reason, prefer CQ WW DX back then, but can't recall why (maybe more "rare" DX showed
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-06/msg00272.html (10,355 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Encouraging contest participation (score: 1)
Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 14:24:34 -0400
You and I go back altogether too far, Hans. I think they stopped doing that late in the 1970s, though in those days the only requirement was that both stations had to have submitted logs - no cross-c
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-06/msg00280.html (9,597 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Encouraging contest participation (score: 1)
Author: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 22:36:38 -0400
I've been giving this some thought. There has been a demand, on and off for quite some time from some, for the ARRL to automatically give awards credit based on submitted contest logs that match up.
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-06/msg00292.html (10,702 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] Encouraging contest participation (score: 1)
Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 09:15:46 -0400
Hi Ron - Every contest QSO I have made since 1994 is in LOTW. I was a beta user of LOTW wat the beginning, and I am not reflexively anti-LOTW at all. I have already apologized to one of the authors f
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-06/msg00298.html (13,551 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] Encouraging contest participation (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 09:34:52 -0700
Ron, Your answer can be found in your own message. The problem with LoTW isn't with the people who want to get the confirmation ... the problem is with the people they want to get their confirmation
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-06/msg00305.html (10,077 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] Encouraging contest participation (score: 1)
Author: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2009 22:35:02 -0400
I've been giving this some thought. There has been a demand, on and off for quite some time from some, for the ARRL to automatically give awards credit based on submitted contest logs that match up.
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-06/msg00313.html (11,580 bytes)

10. Re: [CQ-Contest] Encouraging contest participation (score: 1)
Author: Tim EI8IC <tim.ei8ic@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 18:03:17 -0300
With the internet a major part of many people's lives, it makes sense to integrate it with contesting if it can make contesting 'more fun, more challenging, and generate more participation among the
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-06/msg00315.html (11,161 bytes)

11. Re: [CQ-Contest] Encouraging contest participation (score: 1)
Author: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2009 10:30:07 -0400
What "loss of revenue" for the ARRL? Can't we discuss this without the snide little quips? The irony of that as far back as the late 1950's, possibly the early '60's, the ARRL DID award DXCC credits
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-06/msg00316.html (11,480 bytes)

12. Re: [CQ-Contest] Encouraging contest participation (score: 1)
Author: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 2009 21:35:12 -0400
Pete, I too was a beta-tester for LotW. Is the security for it rather on the high side? Yes. I've heard many people say that LotW is more secure than their on-line banking or credit card services...
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-06/msg00317.html (15,601 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu