- 1. [CQ-Contest] Log checking (score: 1)
- Author: rhiker@uswest.net (Mike Fatchett)
- Date: Sat Mar 6 23:16:32 1999
- I fail to understand why one contest would be checked any more or less thoroughly. I would like them all checked equally regardless if it is the Sprint, the NA QSO party, Novice Roundup, SS, etc....I
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1999-03/msg00069.html (7,542 bytes)
- 2. [CQ-Contest] Log checking (score: 1)
- Author: k4ro@k4ro.net (K4RO Kirk Pickering)
- Date: Mon Mar 8 18:02:38 1999
- I'd say that pretty much makes the point, from my "seasoned rookie" perspective. I'm grateful for the opportunity to see exactly where I need impROvement. Thanks Tree, Trey, and the others involved f
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1999-03/msg00132.html (6,665 bytes)
- 3. [CQ-Contest] Log Checking (score: 1)
- Author: g4buo@compuserve.com (Dave Lawley)
- Date: Sat Jul 27 07:01:00 2002
- This sort of statement worries me: have of programs My understanding was that, for CQWW contests at least, the computer does NOT automatically apply any penalties. It produces a list of potential err
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2002-07/msg00487.html (7,198 bytes)
- 4. [CQ-Contest] Log Checking (score: 1)
- Author: thompson@mindspring.com (David L. Thompson)
- Date: Sun Jul 28 03:36:24 2002
- Dave G4BUO brongs up an excellent point. He fears that everything will be left to the computer software and nothing to a person reviewing the logs. Again I can only speak for the CQ 160 Contests but
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2002-07/msg00514.html (8,261 bytes)
- 5. [CQ-Contest] log checking (score: 1)
- Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>
- Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2008 07:30:10 -0400
- Bravo to Tree for his clear and utterly defensible description of how automated log-checking *must* work. I've been a contester for over 50 years, but for most of those I didn't have the antennas to
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-07/msg00132.html (7,120 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu