Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[VHFcontesting\]\s+Fwd\:\s+VHF\s+Contests\s+Rules\s+Discussion\s+and\s+Proposal\s*$/: 27 ]

Total 27 documents matching your query.

21. Re: [VHFcontesting] Fwd: VHF Contests Rules Discussion and Proposal (score: 1)
Author: w5zn@w5zn.org
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 19:55:49 -0600
Interesting thread. The geographical & population density differences across the country definitely impact a person's perspective on any proposed change to VHF rules more so than on HF. Down here in
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2020-03/msg00042.html (16,754 bytes)

22. Re: [VHFcontesting] Fwd: VHF Contests Rules Discussion and Proposal (score: 1)
Author: Stu <stu@stu2labs.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 08:21:24 -0400
I have a slightly different take. FT8 has been a boon to our contest group. (W4IY) Our guys are getting older and some have difficulty with weak signal work. It's always interesting to see ocean grid
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2020-03/msg00045.html (11,428 bytes)

23. Re: [VHFcontesting] Fwd: VHF Contests Rules Discussion and Proposal (score: 1)
Author: John Kludt <johnnykludt@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 22:07:11 -0400
I am told the original reason for 2 points for CW and 1 for SSB was a good phone operator could make twice as many QSO's per unit of time as a CW op and the differential leveled the playing field. If
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2020-03/msg00055.html (36,378 bytes)

24. Re: [VHFcontesting] Fwd: VHF Contests Rules Discussion and Proposal (score: 1)
Author: Tom Mayo <tmayo6@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 10:47:53 -0400
Folks, Seems like we should support both automatic modes and manual modes. One idea for having contests is to prepare for times when we need emergency communications. Hams provide the last ditch comm
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2020-03/msg00056.html (34,571 bytes)

25. Re: [VHFcontesting] Fwd: VHF Contests Rules Discussion and Proposal (score: 1)
Author: Dave <kdcarlso@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:45:01 -0400
No offence but It's obvious that this proposal is coming from a group of long time VHF contesters. The issue I see with this proposal is that you heavily reward the individuals/groups that have been
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2020-03/msg00058.html (35,400 bytes)

26. Re: [VHFcontesting] Fwd: VHF Contests Rules Discussion and Proposal (score: 1)
Author: John Young via VHFcontesting <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 20:31:37 +0000 (UTC)
I like your propsal E2 and strongly support it.  I will send a supportive email. My 4 band mountain top station, used for competing in FM Only is even more capable on SSB than it is on FM.  I only go
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2020-03/msg00059.html (31,613 bytes)

27. Re: [VHFcontesting] Fwd: VHF Contests Rules Discussion and Proposal (score: 1)
Author: Bob K0NR - email list <list@k0nr.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2020 18:01:45 -0600
Hi all, I was going to sit this one out but debating VHF contest rules is way too much fun. :-( There are always multiple things to "fix" in the VHF contest rules but I think the big issue on the tab
/archives//html/VHFcontesting/2020-03/msg00060.html (14,913 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu