Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Publishing\s+complete\s+logs\s+i\/o\s+UBNs\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Publishing\s+complete\s+logs\s+i\/o\s+UBNs\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Publishing complete logs i/o UBNs (score: 1): Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <eu1sa@belsonet.net>; Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 10:13:19 +0300; Gents, There came up an idea to publish complete logs upon checked, etc. And this idea is followed by supporting votes. Let me express an opposite opinion and to explain, why. For several years I am; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-05/msg00223.html (8,286 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Publishing complete logs i/o UBNs (score: 1): Author: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com; Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 09:40:14 EDT; No one said anything about blacklisting anyone. I am proud of my UBNs numbers, at least on SSB, and I work hard to keep the rate as close to zero as possible....fat chance, right! Recently I got back; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-05/msg00227.html (7,606 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Publishing complete logs i/o UBNs (score: 1): Author: VR2BrettGraham <vr2bg@harts.org.hk>; Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 14:00:59 +0000; EU1SA ppsted: IMHO, yes. After seeing in my CQ WW UBN that I lost Qs with a certain station & that station had a higher UBN rate in CQ WW Honor Roll, I made certain that I was really working that sta; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-05/msg00228.html (8,678 bytes)
4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Publishing complete logs i/o UBNs (score: 1): Author: "Tonno Vahk" <tonno.vahk@mail.ee>; Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 20:08:19 +0300; well, I think it is quite hypothetical that some newcomers will actually get mocked because of the mistakes they made and will leave contesting because of that... Anyway, what we want mostly is to ha; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-05/msg00233.html (9,791 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]