Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+no\s+no\s+no\.\.\.it\s+MUST\s+be\s+579\s+\(was\s+599\)\s*$/: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] no no no...it MUST be 579 (was 599) (score: 1)
Author: kr2q@optimum.net
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 22:28:05 +0000 (GMT)
Sorry folks...but ever try reading the RULES? IV. NUMBER EXCHANGE: Phone: RS report plus zone (i.e., 5705). CW: RST report plus zone (i.e., 57905). So we are all REQUIRED to send 5705 or 57905, irres
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-07/msg00439.html (7,094 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] no no no...it MUST be 579 (was 599) (score: 1)
Author: Jimk8mr@aol.com
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 23:02:13 EDT
In a perfect world, penalties for busted qsos would be related to the reported signal report. If you give the guy a 59(9) and bust his info, you must be pretty bad at copying signals that are, by you
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-07/msg00445.html (8,473 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] no no no...it MUST be 579 (was 599) (score: 1)
Author: "S56A" <s56a@bit.si>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 09:15:08 +0200
K8MR wrote: If you give him a 33(9) and bust his info, it may be partly the other guy's fault for being so weak, or the fault of neither of you that there was so much QRM and QRN, so therefore not so
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-07/msg00448.html (7,881 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] no no no...it MUST be 579 (was 599) (score: 1)
Author: Ryan Jairam <rjairam@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 07:41:06 -0400
I think that an actual RST report is pretty much useless as RST is simply an opinion at best. What may be useful is if logging software (voluntarily) records "S" meter readings and this was kept in a
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-07/msg00449.html (8,954 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] no no no...it MUST be 579 (was 599) (score: 1)
Author: "Radio K0HB" <kzerohb@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 08:30:50 -0800
It isn't so much whether the report is accurate (or not accurate) but rather whether it is actually "exchanged". Since the rules require it to be part of the exchange, it follows that it should be se
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-07/msg00455.html (9,567 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] no no no...it MUST be 579 (was 599) (score: 1)
Author: mike l dol dormann <w7dra@juno.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 09:36:34 -0700
My two favorite "contests" right now are SKCC and CX. In both; seemingly accurate RSTs transferred. When I work a CQWW or an ARRL DX from my house in Burien, WA, 90% of all contacts are at an RST lev
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-07/msg00460.html (9,641 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] no no no...it MUST be 579 (was 599) (score: 1)
Author: Henk Remijn PA5KT <pa5kt@remijn.net>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 19:31:46 +0200
I am so happy that I only speak Dutch. Rules are in English. So NO rules for me. 73 Henk PA5KT Op 23-07-2010 0:28, kr2q@optimum.net schreef: -- Henk Remijn PA5KT email: pa5kt@remijn.net www: www.pa5k
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-07/msg00461.html (9,671 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] no no no...it MUST be 579 (was 599) (score: 1)
Author: "HK3CW" <cwdude@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:29:58 -0500
Ignorance of the rules doesn't make you immune to them. _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-07/msg00463.html (10,537 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] no no no...it MUST be 579 (was 599) (score: 1)
Author: Ryan Jairam <rjairam@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 16:46:50 -0400
You can be immune if you don't submit a log. Ryan, N2RJ -- Sent from my mobile device Ryan A. Jairam, _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2010-07/msg00471.html (11,842 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu