Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Crosschecking\,\s+Penalties\,\s+Accuracy\,\s+Log\s+Massage\s*$/: 6 ]

Total 6 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Crosschecking, Penalties, Accuracy, Log Massage (score: 1)
Author: "Jos&eacute; Nunes CT1BOH" <ct1boh@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 12:14:04 +0000
CROSSCHECKING It is obvious to the majority of contest entrants that the level of log adjudicating has been increasing every year. Notably the CQWW Contest has been the leader in this task, and it is
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-03/msg00040.html (13,737 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Crosschecking, Penalties, Accuracy, Log Massage (score: 1)
Author: K3BU@aol.com
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 11:43:18 EST
to penalize inaccuracy and the ever increasing score reduction penalties may be backfiring with increased tampering of logs by the entrants made possible by the widespread availability of post contes
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-03/msg00045.html (7,954 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Crosschecking, Penalties, Accuracy, Log Massage (score: 1)
Author: Scott Pederson <spederson@yahoo.com>
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 22:38:18 -0800 (PST)
I got it - How about 100 pts for skimming the logs after the contest, assembling a list of the domestic Zero-Point calls from the logfile, and extending an introductory email about the world of conte
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-03/msg00058.html (8,903 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Crosschecking, Penalties, Accuracy, Log Massage (score: 1)
Author: Barry <w2up@mindspring.com>
Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2006 11:45:30 +0000
Seems we're getting into that time of year when we start rehashing old arguments again. Maybe SO2R as a separate category and eliminating Packet will be next... Re the subject at hand, I disagree, Yu
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-03/msg00061.html (9,565 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Crosschecking, Penalties, Accuracy, Log Massage (score: 1)
Author: "Marijan Miletic" <s56a@bit.si>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 16:56:37 +0100
Jose, I like your professional examples of variuos cross checking and error rate levels as they are all linear :-) I did some log checking for multiops at K1B and 3V8BB and corrected obvious errors.
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-03/msg00070.html (7,810 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Crosschecking, Penalties, Accuracy, Log Massage (score: 1)
Author: "Shelby Summerville" <k4ww@arrl.net>
Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2006 18:28:42 -0500
Barry wrote: "Seems we're getting into that time of year when we start rehashing old arguments again. Maybe SO2R as a separate category and eliminating Packet will be next..." I don't think that a se
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-03/msg00074.html (8,247 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu