- 1. [CQ-Contest] contest QSOs (score: 1)
- Author: K4BAI@worldnet.att.net (John T. Laney, III)
- Date: Mon Mar 9 11:18:52 1998
- One type of pile-up management technique that bothers me more than Danny's examples is the failure of the running station to acknowledge the exchange sent to him. Some few think they save time by hit
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-03/msg00131.html (8,632 bytes)
- 2. [CQ-Contest] contest QSOs (score: 1)
- Author: k4nr@mindspring.com (Thomas Branch)
- Date: Mon Mar 9 10:34:17 1998
- Greetings, Been following this thread with interest. It appears that this type of exchange works: Him: P40W Contest Me: K4NR Him: K4NR 59 K Me: Thanks, P40W 59 AL Him: Thanks, P40W Contest I like to
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-03/msg00133.html (7,107 bytes)
- 3. [CQ-Contest] contest QSOs (score: 1)
- Author: felipe@isla.net (Felipe J Hernández
- Date: Mon Mar 9 13:30:32 1998
- Hi all, I love hi-speed type of Qsos on phone and CW and Operating varies as much as there are many different operators. I dont like when I work somebody and they dont send any confirmation and I adm
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-03/msg00137.html (8,894 bytes)
- 4. [CQ-Contest] contest QSOs (score: 1)
- Author: dietz@texas.net (C. Logan Dietz)
- Date: Mon Mar 9 14:06:51 1998
- "Thanks" is a lot shorter than "QSL" at least in sylables. I add words when the going is slow (like almost always on 10!) and subtract when words it gets faster. I try to be "nicer" when it is slow t
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-03/msg00141.html (7,435 bytes)
- 5. [CQ-Contest] contest QSOs (score: 1)
- Author: k1vr@juno.com (Fred Hopengarten)
- Date: Mon Mar 9 15:17:37 1998
- On Mon, 9 Mar 1998 10:34:17 -0600 "Thomas Branch" <k4nr@mindspring.com> writes: K1VR: The "Thanks" is polite, but unnecessary, as going forward with the exchange is enough of an acknowledgement.. K1V
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-03/msg00143.html (7,900 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu