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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+SO\s+Categories\s*$/: 17 ]

Total 17 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] SO Categories (score: 1): Author: Bill via CQ-Contest <cq-contest@contesting.com>; Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 04:58:50 +0000 (UTC); With panadapters, waterfall displays, SO2R, and bandmaps allowed in unassisted it is actually impossible to determine who is using Skimmer technology and who isn't. If you disagree with this, please; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-03/msg00268.html (8,080 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO Categories (score: 1): Author: Ria Jairam <rjairam@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 12:46:22 +0000; Regarding band scopes and panadapters - I quote from the Stew Perry contest, rule 6: We do realize band scopes can show that someone is on 1829.3 - but since they don't tell you who is actually there; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-03/msg00270.html (8,378 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO Categories (score: 1): Author: RT Clay <rt_clay@bellsouth.net>; Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 13:58:22 +0000 (UTC); I disagree. Unassisted and assisted are still quite different. The main difference with bandmaps/waterfalls is that they provide point/click tuning which is not sequential. They do not decode CW (th; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-03/msg00272.html (8,865 bytes)
4. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO Categories (score: 1): Author: w5ov@w5ov.com; Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 07:20:29 -0600; Bill has an interesting point here. Are contest entrants getting their moneys' worth from the contest adjudicators? Since there are no entry fees, the case could be made that entrants get a lot more; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-03/msg00274.html (12,611 bytes)
5. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO Categories (score: 1): Author: Jorge Diez - CX6VM <cx6vm.jorge@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 16:04:44 -0300; Bob First of all, I want all the cheaters to be caught, I want this to be very clear. But your email really surprised me. All must be treated equally. You said "Look at those scores - all made withou; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-03/msg00277.html (15,868 bytes)
6. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO Categories (score: 1): Author: Ria Jairam <rjairam@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 20:13:31 +0000; I've said much on this topic but I want to ask a few questions to those on the "merge" side. The motivation to merge seems to be that SO unassisted has people who cheat and use unclaimed assistance.; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-03/msg00278.html (11,380 bytes)
7. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO Categories (score: 1): Author: Ria Jairam <rjairam@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 20:32:28 +0000; Some of these are my friends so please take no offense. However these guys are in the Caribbean, where as long as you have stamina to run and a decent signal you will make high scores. Ria N2RJ _____; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-03/msg00280.html (11,655 bytes)
8. [CQ-Contest] SO Categories (score: 1): Author: <w2lc@twcny.rr.com>; Date: Sat, 11 Mar 2017 23:56:34 +0000; If CQWW merges SO and SOA then I'll pass on that contest. And I'll also pass on the CQ magazine subscription as well. Same goes for any other contest that combines SO and SOA. I don't have a problem; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-03/msg00283.html (8,977 bytes)
9. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO Categories (score: 1): Author: Peter Sundberg <sm2cew@telia.com>; Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 08:33:01 +0000; Right on Ria, Could it be that some unassisted operators actually produce higher scores than many of the highly skilled assisted operators? Maybe they are intimidated by this fact. Guess the best way; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-03/msg00284.html (9,111 bytes)
10. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO Categories (score: 1): Author: Saulius Zalnerauskas <ly5w.sam@gmail.com>; Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 17:23:11 +0200; 5 days after contest is very long time. Best is 5 hours after contest. Or just immiadetly. Less cheaters. But i am for ONE SINGLE OP CATEGORY. NO ASSISTED. Sam LY5W 2017-03-12 04:12 ra: If CQWW merge; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-03/msg00286.html (9,523 bytes)
11. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO Categories (score: 1): Author: Dave Edmonds <dave@pkministrywebs.com>; Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 11:22:01 -0400; The 5 day log submission requirement makes sending in a log difficult. There have times when I've had to hand log due to problems with sw etc... Converting the log to a 'readable' format, ie cabrillo; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-03/msg00287.html (10,394 bytes)
12. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO Categories (score: 1): Author: <john@kk9a.com>; Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 13:43:02 -0400; CQWW will take your log at any time, it is just not eligible for awards after five days unless you get an extension. LU5DX also asked me for my WW CW log in January. His email even stated how many QS; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-03/msg00289.html (8,977 bytes)
13. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO Categories (score: 1): Author: Mark Bailey <kd4d@comcast.net>; Date: Sun, 12 Mar 2017 15:10:07 -0400; Merging Assisted/Unlimited with multi-op? 73, Mark, kd4d -- Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity. _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing lis; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-03/msg00291.html (10,740 bytes)
14. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO Categories (score: 1): Author: Jorge Diez - CX6VM <cx6vm.jorge@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 09:20:57 -0300; Hello 5 days is for who want to be eligible for awards. Anytime is good to send a log to help in the process of checklog. LU5DX and other do a great job typing in paper logs, collecting logs and all; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-03/msg00298.html (12,304 bytes)
15. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO Categories (score: 1): Author: Martin Monsalvo - LU5DX <lu5dx@lucg.com.ar>; Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 09:55:52 -0300; Thank you so much John, Scott and all those who kindly sent in their CQWW CW logs upon request. Your logs are truly appreciated and are of big help when it comes to improving log checking and the res; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-03/msg00301.html (10,310 bytes)
16. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO Categories (score: 1): Author: Martin Monsalvo - LU5DX <lu5dx@lucg.com.ar>; Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 11:02:18 -0300; Hola Geo, Yes indeed. I think very competitive logs should be sent no later than 24 hours after the contest ends, preferablybly, if possible, right after the contest ends. 73, Martin LU5DX Enviado de; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-03/msg00305.html (13,845 bytes)
17. Re: [CQ-Contest] SO Categories (score: 1): Author: Ria Jairam <rjairam@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 14:08:09 +0000; Yes,, decreases chances of log massaging. I can't believe after contest I get emails from some unscrupulous competitors to verify QSOs. I say what's in your log, you submit, I don't help cheaters. Ri; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2017-03/msg00306.html (13,765 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 17
Page: [1]