Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+SS\s+CW\s+question\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+SS\s+CW\s+question\s*$/: 50 ]

Total 50 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: KI9A@aol.com; Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 07:11:11 EST; Is it just me, or more and more stations skipping the callsign part of the exchange?? I noticed this a couple years ago, and, this year, I had maybe 20 or so do this. Not sure how to handle this. Do; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00062.html (6,633 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: Joe <nss@mwt.net>; Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 08:07:19 -0600; I agree, I ran into that a few times, it may make "Their" exchange be sent faster, but it sure threw off my rhythm off a LOT so I sometimes missed the CK and section and had to ask for them to be rep; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00067.html (9,637 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: Sean Cavanaugh <seanc@unixgeeks.ca>; Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 09:18:11 -0600; Might just be laziness. I had to mangle the default N1MM macro to stick my call in there. 73 Sean - VA5LF _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00070.html (8,170 bytes)
4. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: Jim Reisert AD1C <jjreisert@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 08:54:40 -0700; To me, it seemed that more stations failed to send MY call than failed to send their call embedded in the exchange. If I send the exchange, and all I hear back is "## <prec> etc." then I have no idea; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00071.html (8,211 bytes)
5. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: "Gerry Treas, K8GT" <k8gt@mi.rr.com>; Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 11:06:28 -0500; Unfortunately, most, if not all, that do this, don't subscribe to the contest reflector. 73, Gerry, K8GT == Is it just me, or more and more stations skipping the callsign part of the exchange?? I not; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00072.html (8,436 bytes)
6. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us>; Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 13:12:17 -0600; Others may chime in to tell me I don't know what I'm doing (not the first time) but I gave N1MM logger a try for this year's SS and upon setup I noted that its {EXCH} macro did not include my callsig; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00074.html (8,714 bytes)
7. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: "Robert Brandon" <rb@austin.rr.com>; Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 13:40:27 -0600; I had probably 8-10 guys omit their call from the exchange. If you're expecting it as a "sync bit" (like "5NN") it really throws you off. So, we're all in the choir on this reflector, right? But if I; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00075.html (11,072 bytes)
8. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 16:15:50 -0700; The rules require that the station sending the exchange put their call in the exchange. There is no rule that requires the other station's call to be in the exchange. Apples and oranges comparison. O; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00076.html (8,951 bytes)
9. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: "Tom Osborne" <w7why@frontier.com>; Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 14:35:03 -0800; 73, de Nate Hi Nate The problem isn't with the logging software, but the robot. If I type 'U W7WHY 54 OR' in the exchange box when setting up, the robot will reject the Cabrillo file. It has to be j; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00080.html (8,746 bytes)
10. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: "John Geiger" <aa5jg@fidmail.com>; Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 16:00:40 -0800; Joe, I agree completely on the check issue. The rules are pretty plain on what the check is. If it was any number you choose, the rules would say "The check is any number you choose" 73s John AA5JG _; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00082.html (11,486 bytes)
11. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: "David Kozinn, K2DBK" <dkozinn@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 18:17:41 -0500; You might feel differently about sending something other than your real first year licensed if, like me, that year was 2000. (If I sent 55 twice it'd still be faster!) For the record, I did send 00 (; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00083.html (11,435 bytes)
12. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: Mike Fatchett W0MU <w0mu@w0mu.com>; Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 17:07:09 -0700; Do we have to do this each and every year? We have archives for those that want to relive the past........... W0MU _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@c; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00086.html (12,542 bytes)
13. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us>; Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 18:04:31 -0600; I agree 100% and I am not exactly proficient at CW SS so all of the extras and shortcuts make it even more difficult for me to find this contest less like work and more like fun. Still, I soldier on.; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00087.html (9,618 bytes)
14. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: Barry <w2up@comcast.net>; Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 17:13:08 -0700; You need to shorten your VOX delay :.) I think guys who don't send their own call in the exchange should be DQ'd, if they submit a log. It's in the rules and not doing it is a violation that allows a; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00089.html (10,193 bytes)
15. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: Nate Bargmann <n0nb@n0nb.us>; Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 18:32:12 -0600; I guess I swerved into getting that correct without realizing its importance. Thanks! 73, de Nate >> -- "The optimist proclaims that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The pessimist fears th; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00092.html (9,749 bytes)
16. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: "Radio K0HB" <kzerohb@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 18:16:09 -0800; The thing that sets SS apart from other QSO-fests like CQWW is that the exchange is not a predictable "fye nye foe" and that software cannot auto-populate the log. It is a test of Radioman Skills (tm; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00094.html (10,622 bytes)
17. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: Jimk8mr@aol.com; Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 20:09:10 EST; A couple more observations: 1. Skipping your call in the SS exchange is also bad because what immediately follows is another number - which then has to be determined if that number is a new one (the; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00096.html (12,739 bytes)
18. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: Geoffrey Way <wayg@cape-vision.com>; Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 20:23:04 -0500; N1MM allows the use of control characters to adjust speed on the fly within the macro: < = faster by 2wpm thus, <<<<KA1IOR>>>> in the middle of the macro jumps the speed up by 8wpm. No more problem.; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00098.html (9,456 bytes)
19. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: Neil & Heather <neil.goodell@myfairpoint.net>; Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2010 19:05:37 -0500; As a Younger, less experienced contester, I'm caught in the catch-22 of which is right and proper. General consensus is that saving precious time is more valued that protocol... after all,it is a con; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00099.html (11,854 bytes)
20. Re: [CQ-Contest] SS CW question (score: 1): Author: "Robert Brandon" <rb@austin.rr.com>; Date: Mon, 8 Nov 2010 19:29:07 -0600; Good points, Jim. I like your #5. If I sense the op is a newbie (new call, low number, slow speed, etc.), I'll just request "AGN" rather than asking for a particular element. I think a lot of these g; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-11/msg00100.html (13,179 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2] [3]