Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+New\s+CQ\s+WW\s+DX\s+Rule\s+Bans\s+Post\-Contest\s+Log\s+Changes\s*$/: 24 ]

Total 24 documents matching your query.

21. Re: [CQ-Contest] New CQ WW DX Rule Bans Post-Contest Log Changes (score: 1)
Author: Dick Green <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2012 17:12:47 -0400
Depends on the contest and whether you count the editing time as part of the break. If it's an unlimited operating time contest, like CQ WW, then editing during the contest could cut into your operat
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-08/msg00034.html (44,160 bytes)

22. Re: [CQ-Contest] New CQ WW DX Rule Bans Post-Contest Log Changes (score: 1)
Author: Guy Olinger K2AV <olinger@bellsouth.net>
Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2012 03:47:55 -0400
There is no way to put listening time into a cabrillo log. The log checkers run their own time calculation off the cabrillo. So is the listening time rule still on the books? If it is, it can't be se
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-08/msg00035.html (47,314 bytes)

23. Re: [CQ-Contest] New CQ WW DX Rule Bans Post-Contest Log Changes (score: 1)
Author: Dick Green <wc1m73@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2012 12:29:19 -0400
It's still in the rules for ARRL Sweepstakes (rule 2.7). I thought it was in the WPX rules, but I don't see it there. 73, Dick WC1M Sent from my iPad _______________________________________________ C
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-08/msg00040.html (50,466 bytes)

24. Re: [CQ-Contest] New CQ WW DX Rule Bans Post-Contest Log Changes (score: 1)
Author: Kelly Taylor <ve4xt@mts.net>
Date: Sat, 4 Aug 2012 20:55:59 -0500
I would argue that anyone who clarified a written entry during the dupe sheet process in the paper days (based perhaps on a scribble to the side or maybe just on knowledge of their own penmanship) re
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2012-08/msg00041.html (13,705 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu