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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+CQWW\s+Survey\s*$/: 38 ]

Total 38 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: K1AR@aol.com; Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 17:05:38 -0400 (EDT); To members of the Bruised Egos & Assisted Sucks Club, A few facts: 1) The distribution of the CQWW survey did not include a devious strategy to exclude you. Randy used the WW email list from his rece; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00382.html (7,523 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: brian coyne <g4odv@yahoo.co.uk>; Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 22:39:16 +0000 (GMT); John, Maybe some of the contributors have got carried away somewhat but it cannot be said that there has not been cause for some concern. I completed the survey and answered the question re merging o; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00387.html (10,041 bytes)
3. [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: "$K7ZO$ Scott Tuthill" <k7zo@cableone.net>; Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 19:44:05 -0600; Perfectly said ..... Thanks John. Scott/K7ZO To members of the Bruised Egos & Assisted Sucks Club, A few facts: 1) The distribution of the CQWW survey did not include a devious strategy to exclude yo; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00398.html (8,430 bytes)
4. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: "JIM NEIGER" <n6tj@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2013 21:59:04 -0700; With all due respect, one might reasonably ask as to why such an asinine survey is even contemplated if someone did not already have a canned a priori result in mind and seeking a one size fits all s; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00402.html (10,794 bytes)
5. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: Glenn Wyant <va3dx@sympatico.ca>; Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 08:08:05 -0400; I now realize from the postings on this reflector that I am not a real DX'er I am not a real contester The problem is that I casually enter the contest , I use the cluster network, and I generally on; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00405.html (12,365 bytes)
6. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: Mike Reublin <nf4l@nf4l.com>; Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 08:48:06 -0400; 10 hams are standing around an object that looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks like a duck. 2 think it's an elaborate, nefarious representation of a rattlesnake. 2 wonder why nobody in autho; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00411.html (12,664 bytes)
7. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: Georgek5kg@aol.com; Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 09:05:21 -0400 (EDT); Glenn, Please do carry on, cluster or not! And don't forget the upcoming Florida QSO Party on April 26 & 27. We are expecting those terrific QSOs from you in each county! 73, George & Jim, K4KG/m in; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00413.html (13,757 bytes)
8. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: "Bob Naumann" <W5OV@W5OV.COM>; Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 08:13:18 -0500; Glenn, While some pine for the days of yore when there were no devices containing silicon involved in radio, the reality is that packet, spotting networks, et al are now fully part of amateur radio D; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00414.html (15,694 bytes)
9. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: Maarten van Rossum <pd2r.maarten@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 14:21:50 +0100; *Brian C4Z / 5B4AIZ said * * Having said that I do not believe that there are many serious contest operators who do not read this list and those ops that do are the ones who matter, the ones who make; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00415.html (8,875 bytes)
10. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: brian coyne <g4odv@yahoo.co.uk>; Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 15:01:27 +0000 (GMT); reflector >can't possibly be serious, their opinions don't really matter and they do not >contribute to the success of contests? Of course that is not what I meant but non english speakers/readers w; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00421.html (11,598 bytes)
11. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: Paul O'Kane <pokane@ei5di.com>; Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 15:47:53 +0000; While some pine for the days of yore when there were no devices containing silicon involved in radio, I don't know what that is intended to mean. Does anyone? the reality is that packet, spotting ne; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00423.html (10,008 bytes)
12. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: Andrew Warycka <andrew.warycka@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 08:49:32 -0700; I'm normally a passive reader on here, as I prefer to absorb information and keep my finger on the pulse of the contesting community, but I have to reply to this. So very sadly, today's Generation X; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00424.html (10,713 bytes)
13. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: Pete Smith N4ZR <n4zr@contesting.com>; Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 13:03:04 -0400; Andy, I wouldn't let N6TJ get your goat. He's been off on this trip, along with EI5DI and a few others, for so long thatmost of us have learned to hit the delete key and move on. Not all of us old go; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00427.html (12,767 bytes)
14. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: "Randy Thompson K5ZD" <k5zd@charter.net>; Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 15:13:13 -0500; I bet sailboat racing was a lot different before they had GPS. _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/li; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00428.html (11,320 bytes)
15. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: Steve Dyer <w1srd@yahoo.com>; Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 12:57:21 -0700 (PDT); Well said Pete! An important scientific innovation rarely makes its way by gradually winning over and converting its opponents. What does happen is that its opponents gradually die out, and that the; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00431.html (14,900 bytes)
16. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com; Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 13:33:39 -0400 (EDT); I think that pretty well sums it up. Most of us want two classes. I think we can agree on that...even us crotchety old farts. Now let's talk about WPX next week. Advantage or disadvantage going assis; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00432.html (8,868 bytes)
17. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: "C. \"Fred\" Johnson" <fredwt2p@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 12:45:35 -0500; Amen Andy. I guess all those members of WWYC are poor operators as well? Seriously folks, GET A GRIP. wt2p So very sadly, today's Generation X has no clue on how to operate, and it shows. Oh boy, ski; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00433.html (11,898 bytes)
18. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: "Jerry Muller" <k0tv@k0tv.com>; Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 16:37:43 -0400; Before there was GPS, the top America's Cup boats had multiple on board MicroVAX computers with radio links to big VAXen (the official plural of VAX) on shore and SERIOUS inertial nav systems. Most o; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00434.html (12,621 bytes)
19. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: "Jack Haverty." <k3fiv@arrl.net>; Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 12:47:29 -0700; I heartily agree that it's good to encourage a wide range of technologies. I think the real challenge lies in the issue of "separate classes". There are good reasons for defining all sorts of classes; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00435.html (12,869 bytes)
20. Re: [CQ-Contest] CQWW Survey (score: 1): Author: "Jim Jordan, K4QPL" <k4qpl@nc.rr.com>; Date: Tue, 19 Mar 2013 18:46:51 -0400; This thread has been going on for weeks now. The comments have been good, bad and ugly. They have been thoughtful and sarcastic, polite and rude, positive and negative. However, the one thing that is; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-03/msg00436.html (12,366 bytes)

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