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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Annoying\s+trend\s*$/: 36 ]

Total 36 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: Richard DiDonna NN3W <nn3w@cox.net>; Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 9:36:56 -0500; Hello from Istambul! After 13 hours of flying and being sick yesterday, I finally got a chance to look at some contest-related email. Wow. I've received not one, not two, not three, but four emails a; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00238.html (7,843 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>; Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 07:36:32 -0800; Why not forward those emails to the contest sponsor for adjudication if/when those logs are submitted? They are clearly cheating if they submit their logs. As someone who almost never uses his own ca; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00241.html (8,291 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: John Geiger <johngeig@yahoo.com>; Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 07:40:12 -0800 (PST); And I had one station say that he copied my call incorrectly, even though he said it correctly, because the name and state I gave him didn't match what he had in the files, as he had the info for the; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00242.html (9,297 bytes)
4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: "Hoeft, Roger V" <roger.hoeft@intergraph.com>; Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 09:59:49 -0600; Rich, I can understand the issues with the name, but the state part ... no. Regarding the name, I think it comes down to personal "branding" / recognition. That is, by and large, to the core contesti; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00245.html (10,008 bytes)
5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>; Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 11:35:39 -0700; I would forward those emails to the contest chairman. I believe that is a violation of the rules? I had a similar request in SS 2005. I didn't reply until after the log deadline. I don't even recall; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00246.html (9,354 bytes)
6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: "Tim Goeppinger" <timgep@hotmail.com>; Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 22:00:52 +0000; When I was doing S&P, I had this experience with a couple of smart aleks, even on our first QSO in the contest: Me: K 6 Golf Echo Papa Them: K6GEP - Hello Tim in Orange California! This is Bill in (w; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00256.html (7,849 bytes)
7. Re: [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: <w9wi@w9wi.com>; Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 19:34:19 -0500; MOST interesting. (and disappointing) Strangely enough, I've *never* received an email of that type. Despite having operated a couple of contests in the last year with exchanges that won't match the; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00258.html (8,208 bytes)
8. Re: [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: Richard DiDonna NN3W <nn3w@cox.net>; Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 22:13:23 -0500; One interesting observation that I've made is that folks are definately using QRZ.com during the contests to check contacts - either an automatic feature or a backup check. Before the NAQP, my QRZ.co; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00259.html (10,188 bytes)
9. Re: [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: Kjboasi@aol.com; Date: Mon, 22 Jan 2007 22:47:37 EST; This reminds me of Sweepstakes SSB last year. I had a lot of exchanges like this: Me: "You're number 201 A N2ZN 81 NLI" Other station: "Sorry, I missed some of it. Please confirm your check as 94 and; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00260.html (9,129 bytes)
10. Re: [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: asciibaron@comcast.net; Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 13:30:55 +0000; how is this any different that using SCP or the dupe feature in the logging software. both of those features help to make it easier to operate in the contest. sure there is a point when you have to b; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00272.html (9,008 bytes)
11. [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: Dennis OConnor <ad4hk2004@yahoo.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 05:33:27 -0800 (PST); Last week, I heard a DX station calling CQ on CW... As soon as I called him he came back, "hi dennis'... Which is fine except on cw I am doc... On phone I am denny... Only my wife calls me dennis, an; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00273.html (7,061 bytes)
12. Re: [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: John Geiger <johngeig@yahoo.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 07:25:39 -0800 (PST); From now on, the check Then you are in violation of the rules and should be moved to the checklog or disqualified category. The rules specifically state: 4. Exchange: The required exchange consists o; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00275.html (9,017 bytes)
13. Re: [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: <ve4xt@mts.net>; Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 10:19:47 -0600; People have to be made to realize that the database, if you have one, is only an aid. If what you hear is different from what the database says, the database, in this instance, is wrong. And since QS; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00277.html (11,154 bytes)
14. Re: [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: KI9A@aol.com; Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 17:36:27 EST; Then you are in violation of the rules and should be moved to the checklog or disqualified category. The rules specifically state: 4. Exchange: The required exchange consists of: 4.4. Check (the last; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00278.html (8,374 bytes)
15. Re: [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: Ev Tupis <w2ev@yahoo.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 15:48:54 -0800 (PST); -- Original Message -- MOST interesting. (and disappointing) Strangely enough, I've *never* received an email of that type. -- As fortune has it, today I received an e-mail from a station who I worke; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00279.html (9,076 bytes)
16. Re: [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: Kjboasi@aol.com; Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 19:45:36 EST; Steve, The duping feature in logging programs doesn't give you the exchange before it's sent. That's how it's different. Sure, you can dupe on paper. Personally, I've done it and don't want to go bac; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00280.html (10,828 bytes)
17. [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 18:17:56 -0700; déjà vu all over again! The ARRL has already said you can pick whatever number you want. They don't care. End of transmission Over and out ..._._ Then you are in violation of the rules; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00281.html (8,301 bytes)
18. Re: [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: Mike Tessmer <mtessmer@mindspring.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 20:40:55 -0500 (GMT-05:00); At the risk of prolonging a thread that has already been pummelled into the earth with extreme prejudice: How would you propose to address the small percentage of ops that, for one reason or another; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00282.html (9,113 bytes)
19. Re: [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: John Geiger <johngeig@yahoo.com>; Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 17:55:55 -0800 (PST); But remember that the 59 (or the RST system in general) isn't stated as being relative to anything. Compared to the radio signals coming from Pioneer 10 (which is still sending) all terrestrial signa; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00283.html (10,639 bytes)
20. Re: [CQ-Contest] Annoying trend (score: 1): Author: Jimk8mr@aol.com; Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2007 21:23:41 EST; I was wondering, since some are really picking this last two you were licensed deal apart, if they will DQ themselves because some reports call for signal report, of which all are given 59, when, in; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-01/msg00284.html (8,831 bytes)

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