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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Re\:\s+\[FCG\]\s+QST\s+editing\s+decisions\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Re: [FCG] QST editing decisions (score: 1): Author: k4vud@hotmail.com (Charles Harpole); Date: Sun Jan 20 14:27:49 2002; Hello all, I am a professional editor of history books. I have read QST every month since 1957 and am a life member of ARRL. I think the current editing practice of the magazine is quite poor. On the; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2002-01/msg00391.html (10,013 bytes)
2. [CQ-Contest] Re: [FCG] QST editing decisions (score: 1): Author: K7LXC@aol.com (K7LXC@aol.com); Date: Sun Jan 20 13:08:49 2002; I totally agree with your observations, particularly about the amount of pages devoted to construction articles of highly complicated (IMO - I'm not an EE), extremely narrow appeal devices. I'm reall; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2002-01/msg00393.html (11,183 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]