Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+When\s+is\s+Skimmer\s+not\s+a\s+Skimmer\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+When\s+is\s+Skimmer\s+not\s+a\s+Skimmer\?\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] When is Skimmer not a Skimmer? (score: 1): Author: Kenneth Silverman <kenny.k2kw@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 15:19:14 -0500; N6TR writes on 3830: the stations is This sure is a fine line, and to me goes against the spirit of the rules. Is this really accepted under the ARRL, CQ etc rules? Kenny K2KW _______________________; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-02/msg00243.html (7,282 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] When is Skimmer not a Skimmer? (score: 1): Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>; Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 16:21:01 -0500; I think so. CT1BOH thought it up - called "blind mode", and it was announced over a year ago - I haven't heard any objection. Should it be legal? I have my doubts, unless the waterfall is turned off; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-02/msg00250.html (8,846 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] When is Skimmer not a Skimmer? (score: 1): Author: RT Clay <rt_clay@bellsouth.net>; Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 14:44:42 -0800 (PST); I see nothing wrong with just displaying signals on a bandscope. It's been available to owners of fancy Icom rigs for years. The CQ160 rules even say "Passive spotting does NOT include band scopes, S; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-02/msg00255.html (10,480 bytes)
4. Re: [CQ-Contest] When is Skimmer not a Skimmer? (score: 1): Author: <k8gt@mi.rr.com>; Date: Sun, 21 Feb 2010 21:20:49 -0500; Why so? There's no decoding going on. The operator still has to decode it. Just visually instead of aurally. No real difference, just using a different sense. And like using cluster, it's SO "Distrac; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-02/msg00274.html (9,614 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]