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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+\[Bulk\]\s+Check\s+\#\s+in\s+SS\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [CQ-Contest] [Bulk] Check # in SS (score: 1): Author: "V. Sidarau" <vs_otw@rogers.com>; Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 21:19:51 -0400; Yes, indeed. The topic is too serious not to stumble upon that eventually. Regarding Phone: Four is the worst followed by Eight, Seven is the best followed by Five. As for CW, 2,3,7 and 8 are the eas; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-10/msg00068.html (8,527 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] [Bulk] Check # in SS (score: 1): Author: <ve4xt@mymts.net>; Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2015 20:51:29 -0500; The most efficient check, if this isn't your first time at the rodeo, is the check everybody is expecting you to send. If you've sent 73 in previous SSs, then 73 is your most efficient check. Otherwi; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-10/msg00070.html (10,078 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]