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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+State\s+QSO\s+parties\s*$/: 22 ]

Total 22 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] State QSO Parties (score: 1): Author: n4vhk@summitschool.com (Henry Heidtmann); Date: Wed May 5 08:53:45 1999; We've had a nice re-birth of the NC QSO Party, with many mobile operators running through our 100 counties. The Alamance ARC introduced the mix/match awards system, which offers PLAQUES for 10 differ; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1999-05/msg00053.html (7,882 bytes)
2. [CQ-Contest] State QSO Parties (score: 1): Author: TOMK5RC@aol.com (TOMK5RC@aol.com); Date: Sun May 9 13:57:25 1999; This weekend I put about 4 hours in the Nevada QSO Party. Had 463 QSO's and 63 mults (all states but 3). Just reminded myself why I like state qso parties. 1. Rates are great when you are the wanted; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1999-05/msg00168.html (6,676 bytes)
3. [CQ-Contest] State QSO parties (score: 1): Author: geoiii@kkn.net (George Fremin III); Date: Fri Jul 10 10:19:33 1998; Hi, As some of you may know I now edit the contest corral and special events pages in QST. While I am sitting here and putting the September contest page together an idea that someone once suggested; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-07/msg00089.html (8,537 bytes)
4. [CQ-Contest] State QSO parties (score: 1): Author: n6tr@teleport.com (Tree N6TR); Date: Fri Jul 10 14:17:07 1998; I also agree with the idea presented by K5TR to consolidate the QSO parties to a small number of weekends. I have often thought that having an Oregon QSO Party would be best timed on the same weekend; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-07/msg00091.html (8,303 bytes)
5. [CQ-Contest] State QSO parties (score: 1): Author: n4zr@contesting.com (Pete Smith); Date: Fri Jul 10 17:48:26 1998; I'm a little concerned that 5-6 more, relatively pervasive, multi-band, multi-mode contests a year could precipitate quite a backlash from non-contesters. At least currently we can argue that on most; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-07/msg00092.html (9,240 bytes)
6. [CQ-Contest] State QSO parties (score: 1): Author: danki6x@pacbell.net (Dan Violette - KI6X); Date: Fri Jul 10 16:32:19 1998; Actually I have thought about this thing also and had a slightly different thought. I always wished a few small states that were connected would get together for the same QSO party. Recently MO had a; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-07/msg00095.html (8,445 bytes)
7. [CQ-Contest] State QSO parties (score: 1): Author: k0xq@amsat.org (Sean Warner K0XQ); Date: Sat Jul 11 00:58:03 1998; A good idea; but how workable is it? We had to choose our weekend not only to avoid other non-QSO party contests, but also to avoid a couple of local amateur radio related events (mainly hamfests) th; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-07/msg00096.html (8,045 bytes)
8. [CQ-Contest] State QSO parties (score: 1): Author: pigfarmerpolice@juno.com (Pig Farmer); Date: Fri Jul 10 21:41:26 1998; Don't be concerned about the phone segments--especially 75 Meters. Just clear everything with us first and we'll take care of it for you. No problem. 73 and 88, Your Pig Farmer Police Chief < pigfarm; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-07/msg00098.html (8,797 bytes)
9. [CQ-Contest] State QSO Parties (score: 1): Author: 107770.3462@compuserve.com (James P. Cassidy); Date: Sat Jul 11 02:06:42 1998; K5TR, N6TR and others, I agree with the multiple parties on same weekend. EVen if it were the less active ones it would make for more QSOs for all involved. Possibly the CQP and TX QSO Party maybe be; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-07/msg00103.html (8,520 bytes)
10. [CQ-Contest] State QSO Parties (score: 1): Author: TOMK5RC@aol.com (TOMK5RC@aol.com); Date: Sat Jul 11 13:23:00 1998; We tried for years to work with MARAC on making the Texas QSO Party and the CH CW party work harmoniously on one weekend. It never really worked out well. Sponsors are usually pretty territorial, alt; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-07/msg00106.html (8,182 bytes)
11. [CQ-Contest] State QSO parties (score: 1): Author: ku7y@dri.edu (Monte Stark); Date: Sat Jul 11 21:41:58 1998; Hi Tree and all, Interesting idea..... Would sure help the "slow" parties and I don't think it could harm the big ones. But...... (Ah, there's that word again!) Scoring? Maybe if each party had the s; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-07/msg00107.html (8,889 bytes)
12. [CQ-Contest] State QSO Parties (score: 1): Author: 104306.451@compuserve.com (Hal Offutt); Date: Sun Jul 12 01:55:51 1998; I've always liked the fact that the state QSO parties are spread throughout the year. Thanks to them, there is nearly always at least one operating event during most weekends. If I happen to miss a m; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-07/msg00108.html (9,674 bytes)
13. [CQ-Contest] State QSO parties (score: 1): Author: alan@es.com (alan@es.com); Date: Fri Jul 10 14:46:00 1998; I think that this has been mentioned before, and I always believed that it was a good idea. Many people have observed that there are too many contests - some of which are not well attended for variou; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-07/msg00117.html (9,636 bytes)
14. [CQ-Contest] State QSO parties (score: 1): Author: k4oj@ij.net (Jim White, K4OJ); Date: Tue Jul 14 19:32:14 1998; ....I do NOT like the idea of district QSO parties.....especially since I am in the 4th call area! DO you know how MAJOR this would become???????? There are a LOT of 4s into contesting....from VA on; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-07/msg00122.html (8,372 bytes)
15. [CQ-Contest] State QSO parties (score: 1): Author: drkstar7@gte.net (Mark); Date: Wed Jul 15 04:29:59 1998; With regard to the combining of state QSO parties - I think it is a good idea in some cases. For instance, I think that the entire Northwest Division should probably have their respective states' QSO; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-07/msg00135.html (8,239 bytes)
16. [CQ-Contest] State QSO parties (score: 1): Author: nh7a@MCI2000.com (al); Date: Thu Jul 16 05:29:23 1998; There is no problem with a state deciding to have their QSO party on the same date as another state. However, to mandate when a group wants to have their "party" is absurd. Some people want to have t; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-07/msg00137.html (8,000 bytes)
17. [CQ-Contest] State QSO parties (score: 1): Author: n4zr@contesting.com (Pete Smith); Date: Fri Jul 10 17:48:26 1998; I'm a little concerned that 5-6 more, relatively pervasive, multi-band, multi-mode contests a year could precipitate quite a backlash from non-contesters. At least currently we can argue that on most; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-07/msg00335.html (9,348 bytes)
18. [CQ-Contest] State QSO parties (score: 1): Author: danki6x@pacbell.net (Dan Violette - KI6X); Date: Fri Jul 10 16:32:19 1998; Actually I have thought about this thing also and had a slightly different thought. I always wished a few small states that were connected would get together for the same QSO party. Recently MO had a; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-07/msg00337.html (8,558 bytes)
19. [CQ-Contest] State QSO parties (score: 1): Author: k0xq@amsat.org (Sean Warner K0XQ); Date: Sat Jul 11 00:58:03 1998; A good idea; but how workable is it? We had to choose our weekend not only to avoid other non-QSO party contests, but also to avoid a couple of local amateur radio related events (mainly hamfests) th; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-07/msg00338.html (8,147 bytes)
20. [CQ-Contest] State QSO parties (score: 1): Author: pigfarmerpolice@juno.com (Pig Farmer); Date: Fri Jul 10 21:41:26 1998; Don't be concerned about the phone segments--especially 75 Meters. Just clear everything with us first and we'll take care of it for you. No problem. 73 and 88, Your Pig Farmer Police Chief < pigfarm; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-07/msg00340.html (8,747 bytes)

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