Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+WARC\s+Bands\s+and\s+Contesting\:\s+Aargh\!\s+FAQ\s+Update\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] WARC Bands and Contesting: Aargh! FAQ Update (score: 1)
Author: jpescatore@aol.com
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2013 05:39:59 -0400 (EDT)
The Contesting Wiki is locked from updates for maintenance right now, but I've created this entry to add to the Aargh! FAQ at http://wiki.contesting.com/index.php/Arrgh_FAQ : The WARC bands are prett
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-08/msg00031.html (7,439 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] WARC Bands and Contesting: Aargh! FAQ Update (score: 1)
Author: w5ov@w5ov.com
Date: Wed, 7 Aug 2013 09:30:04 -0500
Since the WARC bands are contest-free bands, where's the balance? Where are the contesting-only bands? Of course, there are none. And, it would be absurd to presume that there should be. However, non
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-08/msg00032.html (9,327 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] WARC Bands and Contesting: Aargh! FAQ Update (score: 1)
Author: Ron Notarius W3WN <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2013 10:38:16 -0500 (CDT)
Fight back? Against whom? The trolls who love stirring this up just to make people squirm or start flame wars? Or the very few anti-contest nutz who scream that any activity that they don't approve o
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-08/msg00033.html (10,660 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] WARC Bands and Contesting: Aargh! FAQ Update (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Aug 2013 15:36:28 -0700
Say what? Fight back?? The last thing contesters need is to get pig headed and pick a fight with other hams over agreements that have been in place for decades. We don't occupy less than 20% of weeke
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-08/msg00040.html (9,157 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] WARC Bands and Contesting: Aargh! FAQ Update (score: 1)
Author: "Bob Naumann" <W5OV@W5OV.COM>
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2013 07:17:45 -0500
Embarrassed? Over what? Dave, normally you and I see things in pretty much the same way, so there must be some confusion here over what the issue is. First, I have no desire to put contests on the WA
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-08/msg00041.html (12,520 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] WARC Bands and Contesting: Aargh! FAQ Update (score: 1)
Author: Richard F DiDonna NN3W <richnn3w@verizon.net>
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2013 09:41:33 -0400
Bob, its not worth getting worked up over. A lot of the anti contester types can be summed up in a line from a character named Kyle Reese: "Listen, and understand ... It can't be bargained with. It c
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-08/msg00042.html (10,805 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] WARC Bands and Contesting: Aargh! FAQ Update (score: 1)
Author: <w7dra@juno.com>
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2013 09:12:43 -0700
as a retired contester, but.........Hawaii? Soft island breezes? October? 2104? OCDX?.....but i digress...........with the advent of modern contesting equipment most (CW contests anyway) cram themsel
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-08/msg00047.html (8,790 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] WARC Bands and Contesting: Aargh! FAQ Update (score: 1)
Author: David Gilbert <xdavid@cis-broadband.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2013 09:20:53 -0700
Yes, you and I see things the same way probably 95% of the time, but this time we are polar opposites. I find it highly unsettling that such a high profile member of the contest community as yourself
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-08/msg00048.html (14,986 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] WARC Bands and Contesting: Aargh! FAQ Update (score: 1)
Author: "Bob Naumann" <W5OV@W5OV.COM>
Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2013 06:52:08 -0500
Summary: "We don't need no WARC band contests" (Apologies to Pink Floyd). Again, that would solve nothing. And, to summarize my perspective on all of this: Contesters are not second-class citizens of
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-08/msg00055.html (19,503 bytes)

10. Re: [CQ-Contest] WARC Bands and Contesting: Aargh! FAQ Update (score: 1)
Author: Joe <nss@mwt.net>
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2013 08:28:18 -0500
On 8/9/2013 6:52 AM, Bob Naumann wrote: The facts support my claim that non-contesters get to enjoy a clear majority of the time without a *major* contest going on and that *they need to be tolerant*
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-08/msg00060.html (11,292 bytes)

11. Re: [CQ-Contest] WARC Bands and Contesting: Aargh! FAQ Update (score: 1)
Author: Joe <nss@mwt.net>
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2013 09:16:33 -0500
Apologies to Bob, Not really sure why this message from me came through looking like it came from him. Joe WB9SBD Sig The Original Rolling Ball Clock Idle Tyme Idle-Tyme.com http://www.idle-tyme.com
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-08/msg00062.html (12,589 bytes)

12. Re: [CQ-Contest] WARC Bands and Contesting: Aargh! FAQ Update (score: 1)
Author: Zack Widup <w9sz.zack@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2013 11:21:44 -0500
Good question. I don't know how many of you are keeping track of the commercial shortwave broadcast world, but international shortwave broadcasters are "dropping like flies." It won't be long before
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-08/msg00063.html (9,877 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu