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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Skimmer\s+spots\s+compared\s+to\s+human\s+spots\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Skimmer spots compared to human spots (score: 1): Author: jpescatore@aol.com; Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 06:04:00 -0500 (EST); My experience with accuracy of spots is very different than W5OV's. Using the N1MM software, I have a choice of spot sources,and combinations of sources. When my only choices were the "human driven"; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-02/msg00427.html (8,320 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Skimmer spots compared to human spots (score: 1): Author: "Bob Naumann" <W5OV@W5OV.COM>; Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 07:43:59 -0600; " During a contest it really doesn't help if a bad spot goes out and then 10 people either send out announces or odd new spots to chastise the mis-spotter." I have to disagree with this. If the perso; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-02/msg00438.html (10,108 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]