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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+PAQP\s+Multipliers\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] PAQP Multipliers (score: 1): Author: Steve London <n2icarrl@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 07 Oct 2007 13:27:28 -0600; So, could someone explain to me why the PAQP organizers have chosen the following multipliers for in-state participants: 71 USA ARRL Sections 13 Canadian Entities The 13 Canadian entities are not the; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-10/msg00112.html (7,122 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] PAQP Multipliers (score: 1): Author: Michael Coslo <mjc5@psu.edu>; Date: Mon, 08 Oct 2007 09:00:40 -0400; The reason for the difference between our sections and the new RAC sections was explained to me as an example: Imagine if MA, CT NH, VT, RI, and ME were put in to a single section called NES. Thanks; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2007-10/msg00118.html (8,132 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]