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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Prefills\s+in\s+SS\s+Exchanges\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Prefills in SS Exchanges (score: 1): Author: <w2lc@twcny.rr.com>; Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 17:49:59 +0000; Why would someone change their check? Well speaking for myself, sending a check of 69 was generating way too many calls for repeats on SSB. So sometime after I got my new call W2LC I changed my check; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-11/msg00186.html (7,609 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Prefills in SS Exchanges (score: 1): Author: <john@kk9a.com>; Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 20:20:46 -0500; I find six nine instead of sixty-nine much easier to accurately copy on SSB and best of all it is less syllables. John KK9A To: cq-contest@contesting.com Subject: [CQ-Contest] Prefills in SS Exchange; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-11/msg00192.html (7,655 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Prefills in SS Exchanges (score: 1): Author: Tom Osborne <w7why@frontier.com>; Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2014 17:24:25 -0800; I used to use 'fifty-four' for the check, but had lots or requests for repeats, so I also started using 'five four' for the check and had lots less requests. I think 54 and 64 sound a lot alike in th; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-11/msg00194.html (7,486 bytes)
4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Prefills in SS Exchanges (score: 1): Author: Gary Sutcliffe <w9xt@unifiedmicro.com>; Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2014 04:08:51 +0000; Saying each number separately is best. It is especially important if you are saying a number in the teens. If you say "seventeen", fast typists will type in the 7 before they realize they have it wro; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-11/msg00195.html (8,507 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]