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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Russian\s+DX\s+Contest\s+Log\s+Checking\s*$/: 27 ]

Total 27 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: "Igor Sokolov" <ua9cdc@gmail.com>; Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 20:25:00 +0500; Yes Bob, there can be such an approach. But based on the fact that it is a contest in accuracy of delivering information from A to B would it not be more logical to blame both? Thre are two parties i; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00257.html (11,274 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: steve.root@culligan4water.com; Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 00:13:33 +0000; Once again I'm reminded why I NEVER read UBN reports. Life is easier if you don't worry about things you can't control. 73 Steve K0SR _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailin; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00225.html (8,406 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: "k6xx@juno.com" <k6xx@juno.com>; Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 20:10:08 GMT; That's precisely why most judges in serial number contests allow S/N +/- 1. You cannot tell who is wrong, so blame neither. This is a much cleaner and more satisfactory solution to this common proble; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00220.html (9,743 bytes)
4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: Zoli Pitman HA1AG <ha1ag@hg6n.hu>; Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 17:18:27 +0100; This thread is the most shocking from cq-contest in many years... first started with K5ZD advocating for NOT sending logs in... I read the email and checked if the sun was still setting on west... as; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00217.html (10,624 bytes)
5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 11:50:56 -0500; Correct that someone can cause you to have a NIL through no fault of your own. That sometimes (always?) falls under the heading "Bad Form."* I think this discussion is not about that, Chris. I would; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00198.html (10,368 bytes)
6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: DL8MBS <prickler.schneider@t-online.de>; Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 17:34:05 +0100; Happens in WWDX, too. Soft- or hardwarecrash, a running station deleting a difficult qso afterwards when in doubt, deleting a qso to escape band change rules - and your earn a NIL even when you are i; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00194.html (10,497 bytes)
7. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: "Igor Sokolov" <ua9cdc@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 20:42:05 +0500; I do not like the RDXC approach myself but.... Statistics an impressions. Here we see that impressions prevail. Don't you think it is a bit egocentric? May be you should try this contest from Europe; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00193.html (10,534 bytes)
8. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:08:29 -0500; Information about how other stations bust my call and exchange is available to me for all the major contests. This is nothing unique. Forgive the pun. Mark, N5OT not K5OT ___________________________; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00192.html (9,585 bytes)
9. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: Alfred Frugoli <ke1fo@arrl.net>; Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:27:58 -0400; Almost every contest has some rule that discourages participation, some more blatantly that others. CQWW CW and SSB definitely favor certain geographic areas, while CQWW RTTY puts the twist in of hav; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00190.html (11,930 bytes)
10. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: "George Harlem W1EBI" <w1ebi@lightband.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:05:55 -0400; operation on his part and no knowledge of error on the part of another is: unreasonable. Probably, but at least it's unreasonable without partiality--all ops, Russian and non-Russian, are subject to; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00189.html (10,387 bytes)
11. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 07:19:00 -0500; [snip] Hey Kelly. I agree with you completely that it is a reasonable explanation of what is expected. It takes place successfully roughly 95% of the time. However, the rules do not say that each ope; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00182.html (9,866 bytes)
12. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: "Edward" <sawyered@earthlink.net>; Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 07:12:54 -0400; I have never operated the RDXC and am now certain that I will not do so seriously after reading this "shocking" information about the scoring and penalties. I do know that when I have tuned around an; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00183.html (9,780 bytes)
13. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: "Paul O'Kane" <pokane@ei5di.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 06:05:30 -0800; A QSO is, at minimum, the two-way exchange and acknowledgement of callsigns. As contesters, we are required to log the calls and the exchange. Any mistake, anywhere in this procedure, means it's not; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00178.html (9,750 bytes)
14. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: "Sandy Taylor" <ve4xt@mts.net>; Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 02:09:35 -0500; Hi Mark, While it is something that has not, as far as I know, been adhered to as a standard, a look at the ARRL rules, at least, shows that a QSO only takes place when the callsigns and exchange inf; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00176.html (12,138 bytes)
15. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: "Mark Beckwith" <n5ot@n5ot.com>; Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 21:10:34 -0500; I got emailed privately by two ops who said "it ain't a contest QSO unless both sides log it correctly." I didn't see their posts here on the reflector. I don't agree with those two ops. I suppose th; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00174.html (9,641 bytes)
16. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: Denis Pochuev - K7GK <k7gk@hotmail.com>; Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 16:23:04 -0700; My argument is not about working weak signals, we all try our best. It's about the error rates of others when working loud or weak stations. A loud MA station's call/exchange will be busted less fre; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00162.html (10,784 bytes)
17. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>; Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 14:46:23 -0600; Dave, I understand your point and Randy's. I think what he is trying to say that if one is not going make great effort to get the information correct then don't submit a log as the lack of effort wil; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00157.html (10,978 bytes)
18. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>; Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 13:22:46 -0700; I'm sure Randy is working a lot of very weak signals at his noise level just like everyone else. That a station in Massachusetts can work more layers deep into the opening is a geographic disparity -; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00153.html (9,461 bytes)
19. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: "David Kopacz" <david.kopacz@aspwebhosting.com>; Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 14:26:02 -0500; "If you are not serious in the contest -- please don't send in your log. This will just cause lost points for the other stations. Randy, K5ZD" I've not often disagreed with Randy, but here's one of t; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00146.html (9,003 bytes)
20. Re: [CQ-Contest] Russian DX Contest Log Checking (score: 1): Author: Denis Pochuev - K7GK <k7gk@hotmail.com>; Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 11:13:13 -0700; Not so. An unfortunate (?) side-effect of these rules is that the stations far from the main center of activity for this contest (read Europe) are at a further disadvantage. Whose log will get more; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-03/msg00143.html (8,695 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]