Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Super\-duper\-pooper\s+check\s+database\s+function\s+of\s+TR\,\s+etc\.\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Super\-duper\-pooper\s+check\s+database\s+function\s+of\s+TR\,\s+etc\.\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Super-duper-pooper check database function of TR, etc. (score: 1): Author: tgstewart@pepco.com (tgstewart@pepco.com); Date: Fri May 7 09:39:53 1999; So now we need to do a survey and see if those people using TR with an exchange database did better than those without. This stringent log testing on a contest like SS with lots of ways to go wrong r; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1999-05/msg00130.html (7,260 bytes)
2. [CQ-Contest] Super-duper-pooper check database function of TR, etc. (score: 1): Author: n6tr@teleport.com (n6tr@teleport.com); Date: Fri May 7 09:47:03 1999; My experience with this feature is that there are two problems with it: 1. The data changes more from year to year than you error rate. 2. It distracts you too much from listening to what is being s; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1999-05/msg00140.html (7,402 bytes)
3. [CQ-Contest] Super-duper-pooper check database function of TR, etc. (score: 1): Author: sdelling@facstaff.wisc.edu (Scott Ellington); Date: Fri May 7 13:11:35 1999; I think SCP can reduce the number of broken calls if it is used for verification, not guessing. When a call fails to show up in SCP, I make even more effort to be sure I copied it right. One could us; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1999-05/msg00143.html (7,394 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]