Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+possible\s+error\s+on\s+my\s+part\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+possible\s+error\s+on\s+my\s+part\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] possible error on my part (score: 1): Author: k4oj@tampabay.rr.com (Jim White, K4OJ); Date: Tue Jul 23 15:11:21 2002; I cited as far as which Director voted for QST coverage are not may be in error. I believe the information I was given actually is the vote on Section News being discontinued...does anyone know what; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2002-07/msg00348.html (6,729 bytes)
2. [CQ-Contest] possible error on my part (score: 1): Author: K0LUZ@topsusa.com (K0LUZ); Date: Tue Jul 23 16:24:43 2002; Believe I saw that that issue was decided by a voice vote. Therefore all can claim they voted for keeping data in QST. Sounds like the votes taken in Congress when they are raising their salaries. Re; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2002-07/msg00352.html (7,207 bytes)
3. [CQ-Contest] possible error on my part (score: 1): Author: jmaass@columbus.rr.com (Jeff Maass); Date: Tue Jul 23 16:57:14 2002; I'm surprised that the Section News debacle wasn't by voice vote as well. The public service folks (traffic handlers, ARES types, etc.) get precious little recognition as it is, and many were driven; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2002-07/msg00361.html (9,793 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]