Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Bureau\s+Reply\s+for\s+Multi\-Multi\s+DX\s+Station\s+ContestCards\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Bureau\s+Reply\s+for\s+Multi\-Multi\s+DX\s+Station\s+ContestCards\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [CQ-Contest] Bureau Reply for Multi-Multi DX Station ContestCards (score: 1): Author: Jim Reisert AD1C <jjreisert@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 13:14:25 -0700 (PDT); No, you're not off-ase. I would come to the same conclusion. Time is money. Preemptively sending out 20K QSLs probably takes an order of magnitude LESS time than individually answering 10K QSLs (chec; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-09/msg00121.html (8,092 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Bureau Reply for Multi-Multi DX Station ContestCards (score: 1): Author: "JAMES HEADRICK" <W3CP@CHARTER.NET>; Date: Tue, 11 Sep 2007 22:33:12 -0000; Steve, In my opinion you are not off-base. FWIW I only respond to cards that have an unmistakable request for my card. Preemptive QSLing is an understandable solution for the QSL problem but should n; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-09/msg00124.html (8,848 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]