Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+cqww\s+log\s+checking\s*$/: 10 ]

Total 10 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] cqww log checking (score: 1)
Author: jtolbert@gremlan.org (jtolbert)
Date: Sat Mar 14 17:19:04 1998
This is really cool !! Anyone that sent their CQWW log via e-mail can access it and see what mistakes if any have been made. I made a few.... a few dx stations logged my as WW2S...but what concerns m
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-03/msg00266.html (7,922 bytes)

2. [CQ-Contest] cqww log checking (score: 1)
Author: DougKR2Q@aol.com (Doug KR2Q)
Date: Sat Mar 14 21:53:24 1998
<< but what concerns me most is the 2 mults I lost from the US stations worked on 80m for zone 5 and 15m zone 3...I only worked one station each from US for the zone mults and it seems as though some
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-03/msg00269.html (8,229 bytes)

3. [CQ-Contest] cqww log checking (score: 1)
Author: bhorn@hornucopia.com (Bruce Horn)
Date: Sat Mar 14 21:43:17 1998
This was also my experience -- a well known contester didn't bother to log our QSO on 20m that I made for a zone mult. At the time he was CQing without response, and I know it was a real QSO. At leas
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-03/msg00270.html (8,129 bytes)

4. [CQ-Contest] cqww log checking (score: 1)
Author: alan.kaul@worldnet.att.net (Alan Kaul W6RCL)
Date: Sun Mar 15 00:21:11 1998
What a great service this is -- to make the info available to those who use electronic logging. And a reminder to those whom you work and don't put you in the log -- they might have been anonymous in
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-03/msg00273.html (7,924 bytes)

5. [CQ-Contest] cqww log checking (score: 1)
Author: brad4@bellatlantic.net (M.G. Brafford)
Date: Mon Mar 16 18:29:48 1998
I guess we're all gonna be crying the blues on this one for a while. I also lost several needed QSO's due to bad key strokes on the other end, such as W4UV, W4YO, W4VY etc etc. I made several mis-que
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-03/msg00303.html (7,717 bytes)

6. [CQ-Contest] cqww log checking (score: 1)
Author: brad4@bellatlantic.net (M.G. Brafford)
Date: Tue Mar 17 10:38:54 1998
-- also as more to this program than first meets the eye. I won't necessarly loose a QSO because of a mis key-stroke by the station I work. Some stations have objected to making these records public.
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-03/msg00316.html (8,440 bytes)

7. [CQ-Contest] cqww log checking (score: 1)
Author: jpreston1@home.com (Jim Preston)
Date: Tue Mar 17 08:02:20 1998
snip... snip... I don't think you lose the contact if a call similar to yours is in the other station's log. For example, one station logged me as N6VA and I didn't lose the contact. At least, that i
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-03/msg00317.html (7,955 bytes)

8. [CQ-Contest] cqww log checking (score: 1)
Author: sdelling@facstaff.wisc.edu (Scott Ellington)
Date: Tue Mar 17 10:20:05 1998
Well, the log checking should for once and all eliminate the temptation to leave in questionable QSO's. Previously, those of us out of top-ten contention might have felt we were only penalizing ourse
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-03/msg00318.html (7,932 bytes)

9. [CQ-Contest] cqww log checking (score: 1)
Author: alan.kaul@worldnet.att.net (Alan Kaul)
Date: Tue Mar 17 18:17:43 1998
Alan Kaul, W6RCL, LaCanada, CA w6rcl@amsat.org http://home.att.net/~alan.kaul/qrp.html -- I'm confused about that -- if your call is N6VH and the other station logs you as N6VA and the log-checkers h
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/1998-03/msg00327.html (8,420 bytes)

10. [CQ-Contest] CQWW Log checking (score: 1)
Author: <dave@n1ix.com>
Date: Wed, 6 May 2015 08:38:44 -0400
All this discussion about NIL QSO's causes me to wonder. Since the NIL QSO may be the fault of either station why isn't the QSO just removed from the log without penalty. I understand the penalty if
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-05/msg00090.html (6,796 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu