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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Backwards\s+thinking\s+in\s+log\s+checking\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Backwards thinking in log checking (score: 1): Author: Tree <tree@kkn.net>; Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 12:31:32 -0800; Recently - I had to review some of the log checking process that is being used for the ARRL Sweepstakes contest and came to an interesting conclusion. For purposes of log checking - it is best to "du; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-11/msg00048.html (10,644 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Backwards thinking in log checking (score: 1): Author: "K1TTT" <K1TTT@ARRL.NET>; Date: Wed, 04 Nov 2009 23:01:21 +0000; First, as you should know, there is no way for a log submitter to mark a 'dupe' in a Cabrillo log... nor to mark points, nor to mark multipliers. So your question really goes to how the sponsor proce; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-11/msg00064.html (13,868 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Backwards thinking in log checking (score: 1): Author: "Mike N0HI" <mike@n0hi.net>; Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2009 17:17:17 -0700; I remember N3FJP's program used to yell "DUPE" out the speakers and prevent you from logging one. I'm not sure if this has been changed in more recent versions. Worked a station during SSB who said I; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-11/msg00070.html (16,205 bytes)
4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Backwards thinking in log checking (score: 1): Author: brian coyne <g4odv@yahoo.co.uk>; Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2009 07:49:48 +0000 (GMT); Absolutely Dave. The message that guys have to take on board is that if they do not log dupes, or refuse to work what they think will be a dupe, they could and will lose the points for what they thin; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-11/msg00078.html (11,279 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]