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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+QSLing\s*$/: 70 ]

Total 70 documents matching your query.

21. [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: jjreisert@alum.mit.edu (Jim Reisert AD1C); Date: Tue Feb 24 22:27:23 1998; CT's QSL9 program also does this. - Jim AD1C -- Jim Reisert AD1C <jjreisert@alum.mit.edu> http://jjr.ne.mediaone.net/ -- CQ-Contest on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/_cq-contest/ Administrative reque; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-02/msg00277.html (7,811 bytes)
22. [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: john.devoldere@innet.be (John Devoldere ON4UN); Date: Wed Feb 25 00:07:30 1998; Why do we bring up this issue over and over again. I KNOW for a fact that most station do appreciate getting cards, especially if it is a nice color card. I send out cards for each contest QSO. Many; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-02/msg00281.html (10,400 bytes)
23. [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>; Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2016 17:50:47 -0600; I just finished my QSLing duties for the months of December and November. I ended up with about 150 cards to the Outgoing Bureau. I have always QSLed 100% to cards I get via the bureau because I reme; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-12/msg00451.html (7,984 bytes)
24. Re: [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: Hank Garretson <w6sx@arrl.net>; Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2016 17:03:22 -0800; There are alternatives for outgoing buro QSLs. I use http://globalqsl.com/ . I do about 1000 outgoing cards per year. One-hundred cards take about forty-five minutes of my time. For something like $1; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-12/msg00452.html (10,318 bytes)
25. Re: [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: Ria Jairam <rjairam@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2016 01:15:13 +0000; I find the whole fee increase disconcerting even though I prefer LoTW over paper cards (because I get so many paper cards!) however postage costs are not what they used to be and I think that beyond; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-12/msg00453.html (10,642 bytes)
26. [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: Randall K Martin <rkmassoc@comcast.net>; Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2016 18:39:35 -0700; On a different thread for the subject, I'm wondering if there is the possibility of setting up a "NO QSL" list, similar to the no-call list for phones (although the no-call list doesn't seem to work; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-12/msg00454.html (8,765 bytes)
27. Re: [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: Charles Harpole <hs0zcw@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2016 08:48:35 +0700; Bill, A reason DX do not use LoTW is it is too difficult to set up. Use is ok, but the set up is a killer. I recommend you and many others good at its use, ADOPT A NON-USER, talk him thru the install; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-12/msg00455.html (10,372 bytes)
28. Re: [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: Ted Melinosky <k1bv12@charter.net>; Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2016 20:58:27 -0500; I manage QSLing for EY8MM and 4L8A, and the bureau cards come in by the pound (at least when conditions were better). The new ARRL Outgoing Bureau charges are going to be a heavy burden in the future; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-12/msg00456.html (10,245 bytes)
29. Re: [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: W0MU <w0mu@w0mu.com>; Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2016 19:10:01 -0700; Look at Global QSL Service. You upload what you want for your card, upload your qso's, they print it and mail it off. I am sure it has to be cheaper than the price you quote. Postage overseas is beyo; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-12/msg00457.html (10,010 bytes)
30. Re: [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2016 00:09:44 -0800; Yes. The cost of international postage and shipping have made paper QSLs a luxury that few of us can afford. Sure, having a paper card for a rare or difficult QSO is nice, but those costs have made i; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-12/msg00459.html (11,182 bytes)
31. Re: [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: Prasad VU2PTT <vu2ptt@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2016 17:26:47 +0530; Jim IOTA now has a viable electronic QSL method based on matches for your logs uploaded to ClubLog. I applied and received an award recently using that method. 73 de Prasad VU2PTT Sent from my iPhone; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-12/msg00461.html (12,221 bytes)
32. Re: [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: "Carol Richards" <n2mm@comcast.net>; Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2016 07:40:20 -0500; Hello all, I have to agree about the ARRL bureau's new fees. It breaks my heart to stop qsl'ing via the bureau, but I have no choice. As an active contester, I would get 500+ qsls twice or three time; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-12/msg00462.html (13,194 bytes)
33. Re: [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: Barry <w2up@comcast.net>; Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2016 06:34:35 -0700; Just say no to paper QSLs. While they may have sentimental value, they are an anachronism. I used to QSL 100% received. In 2009, when I downsized, cleaned house, and moved across the country, I decid; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-12/msg00463.html (11,853 bytes)
34. [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: <kr2q@optimum.net>; Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2016 12:53:18 GMT; I don't understand why postage rates around the world are going crazy. I got this in an email earlier this week: [snip] As of Jan 1st 2017 postage in Sweden will raise with 50% [end snip] Either the; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-12/msg00464.html (8,803 bytes)
35. Re: [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: Ktfrog007--- via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>; Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2016 09:21:04 -0500; IOTA is now using ClubLog matches for their award. I just got my IOTA award using ClubLog confirmations a few days ago. I was always reluctant to send QSLs through the mail so I never applied before.; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-12/msg00466.html (9,257 bytes)
36. Re: [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: W0MU Mike Fatchett <w0mu@w0mu.com>; Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2016 07:38:57 -0700; K9YC wrote: From where I sit, LOTW is one of the very best things ARRL has done for ham radio in the last 20 years. I no longer bother with awards that won't accept LOTW or eQSL. That rules out count; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-12/msg00467.html (9,181 bytes)
37. Re: [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: "Bill Parry" <bparry@rgv.rr.com>; Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2016 08:51:03 -0600; You and I are in the same "tub"! :-) I have over the last year started looking carefully at the card and making sure that they have asked for a return QSL...a lot don't. Another trick that I have sta; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-12/msg00469.html (11,163 bytes)
38. Re: [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: Joe Fischer <w8jpf@fischerhome.org>; Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2016 10:50:27 -0500; Im changing my call sign as of the middle of January. Seriously thinking about changing my policy to not respond to bureau cards with the new call sign but honor any requests on my old call sign for; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-12/msg00470.html (8,612 bytes)
39. Re: [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: Hank Garretson <w6sx@arrl.net>; Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2016 07:58:07 -0800; If a paper card encourages a ham to stay on the air, then that is purpose enough for me. If a paper card encourages fraternalism, then that is purpose enough for me. If a paper card makes the day of; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-12/msg00471.html (9,610 bytes)
40. Re: [CQ-Contest] QSLing (score: 1): Author: David Siddall <hhamwv@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 31 Dec 2016 11:01:01 -0500; It costs $3.50 to send a card from Denmark to the U.S., but only $1.20 to send the same card from the U.S. to Denmark. In fact, it is less expensive to send a card to Copenhagen from Washington than; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-12/msg00472.html (10,467 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 40
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4]