Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Driving\s+at\s+4AM\s*$/: 55 ]

Total 55 documents matching your query.

21. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 15:25:45 -0500
Now *that's* over the top! Slavery? Give me a break! I think I read the same public commentary as you did, David, and I thought it was almost uniformly opposed to your position. Since any controversi
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00130.html (11,620 bytes)

22. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 14:43:42 -0700
Not to mention illegal searches and mandatory drug tests. Over the top and a political stand which has nothing to do with contesting. So far I have yet to hear one compelling argument why logs should
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00133.html (12,962 bytes)

23. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: "David Kopacz" <david.kopacz@aspwebhosting.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 15:40:31 -0600
Of course I did nothing wrong. But public opinion does not make it right for CQ Magazine to publish my personal property without my consent. That IS the issue. It is solely a principle issue, nothing
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00135.html (13,760 bytes)

24. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 15:26:55 -0700
I'm one of those who think your original statement was misguided, but I personally never accused you (either publicly or privately) of doing anything wrong, and I'd be willing to bet money that you d
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00140.html (11,110 bytes)

25. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 15:35:04 -0700
Dave it is just another rule. They also force us to operate for a set period of time with power regulations, mode restrictions etc. They don't ask us to use 599 08 they tell us. What is the differenc
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00141.html (16,940 bytes)

26. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: <w1md@cfl.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:58:30 -0500
Nobody's chipping away at anything David. Are you 'forced' to submit your logs??? Have you EVER been forced to submit your logs? When you submit your logs you are agreeing to abide by the rules as se
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00144.html (16,008 bytes)

27. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: "David Kopacz" <david.kopacz@aspwebhosting.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:08:10 -0600
Mike, Thanks for your thoughtful reply. Publishing a log after the contest is NOT a rule, nor is it consensual. Instead, it is coerced. Either agree to your log being published or forfeit eligibi8lit
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00145.html (19,623 bytes)

28. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 18:08:35 -0500
A very non-scientific poll. First I've heard of it... if you're going to cite this as a "fact" then it should be... dare I say it... OPEN and more people made aware of it? C'mon. The current survey o
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00146.html (9,676 bytes)

29. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 18:20:13 -0500
So the long & the short of your reply is that if I object on philosophical grounds to open logs, for what I consider valid reasons, I therefore am enabling the cheaters and scoundrels? This, my frien
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00147.html (12,373 bytes)

30. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: "K1TTT" <K1TTT@ARRL.NET>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 23:15:05 +0000
I guess I don't understand the 'personal property' part of it. In days of yore when station logs were required by the fcc I always felt it was kind of like a public record since it was required by r
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00148.html (9,606 bytes)

31. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: <w1md@cfl.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 20:01:28 -0500
4. Electronic log submission: We want your electronic log. The Committee requires an electronic log for any possible high-scoring log. By submitting a log to the CQ WW Contest, the entrant agrees to
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00149.html (12,146 bytes)

32. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: "K0HB" <kzerohb@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:59:21 -0600
Nor have we seen any compelling argument why they should be not be closed. 73, de Hans, K0HB/W7 _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http:
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00150.html (9,931 bytes)

33. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:04:38 -0700
Actually, I submitted the original text for the current survey at contesting.com, but it didn't get published as I wrote it. I had tried to be extremely objective in the wording and briefly give exam
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00151.html (10,711 bytes)

34. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:06:21 -0700
I guess it's all in the timing ;) 73, Dave AB7E _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-conte
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00152.html (10,267 bytes)

35. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:32:22 -0700
I get it. I don't think you get it Dave. You still have a choice to operate the contest how you like. If you want to be considered for awards then you follow their rules. Does it matter who makes the
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00153.html (21,877 bytes)

36. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:59:32 -0700
Feel free to go to www.contesting.com That site has been around for a long time. Who said anything about scientific. If a poll is not conducted by paid Harvard grads it has no value? I am starting to
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00155.html (10,529 bytes)

37. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: "David Kopacz" <david.kopacz@aspwebhosting.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:44:21 -0600
Interesting points Dave, I'll have to ponder this for a while. David ~ KY1V my a I guess I don't understand the 'personal property' part of it. In days of yore when station logs were required by the
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00157.html (11,163 bytes)

38. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 18:23:02 -0700
Actually I think we have. Since it is required by the sponsor it really doesn't matter. I suspect there are good reasons for doing this. I will trust the sponsor and the log checkers just as I have s
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00158.html (10,598 bytes)

39. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: <w1md@cfl.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 17:23:43 -0800
No...a better analogy is that the person needs to show his 'invitation' to the formal event before being admitted...in this case the invitation is the log. ___________________________________________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00159.html (10,530 bytes)

40. Re: [CQ-Contest] Driving at 4AM (score: 1)
Author: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>
Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 18:26:56 -0700
Don't care works. Neither for nor against. While for open logs because those that check the logs thinks this is a good idea it would not change my contesting style or contests one either way. "A slip
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-02/msg00161.html (11,585 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 40
Page: [1] [2] [3]
This search system is powered by Namazu