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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+rules\s*$/: 21 ]

Total 21 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Rules (score: 1): Author: "wa4dou@juno.com" <wa4dou@juno.com>; Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2004 17:46:51 GMT; I believe it is right and does make sense to make rules that are unenforceable, just because there is no one to stand over your shoulder and watch. I will not begin in any sense of the word to enjoy; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00465.html (8,103 bytes)
2. Fw: [CQ-Contest] Rules (score: 1): Author: "Rex Maner" <k7qq@netzero.net>; Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 03:28:12 -0000; Roy this is a Quack Note You have been taking all this stuff 2 TOO serious, Most of it is just B.S. about the band maps etc. If somone comes on 5, 10 or 15 minutes prior to an Operating event to esta; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00483.html (9,308 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Rules (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat1242@ispwest.com>; Date: Thu, 18 Nov 2004 08:04:37 -0800; _________________________________________________________ That is simply not true. You are also cheating the rightful winner, and that's why cheating should be rooted out and exposed as much as possi; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-11/msg00490.html (7,695 bytes)
4. [CQ-Contest] rules (score: 1): Author: Eric Scace K3NA <eric@k3na.org>; Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 12:10:31 -0400; Hi Randy et al -- We are seeing a blizzard of rules proposals and counter-proposals. But we don't actually know if there is a "problem" yet with CW skimmers. Rather than changing rules, let's do this; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-06/msg00110.html (7,312 bytes)
5. Re: [CQ-Contest] rules (score: 1): Author: kd4d@comcast.net; Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 16:56:58 +0000; Hi Eric: If the Skimmer was just a single program which was roughly frozen at its current capabilities, I would agree with you. However, I think it will rapidly evolve and that others will create pro; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-06/msg00112.html (8,520 bytes)
6. Re: [CQ-Contest] rules (score: 1): Author: Dale Putnam <daleputnam@hotmail.com>; Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 12:02:40 -0600; I oon't usually like the "me too" posts... but this one seems to hit the nail...directly... with no side effects.... and doesn't offend me... has all the positive needed, no negative. Way to go Eric!; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-06/msg00118.html (8,921 bytes)
7. Re: [CQ-Contest] rules (score: 1): Author: "Tod -ID" <tod@k0to.us>; Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 13:10:44 -0600; Sounds sensible to me Eric and Randy. Tod, K0TO _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-conte; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-06/msg00119.html (8,627 bytes)
8. [CQ-Contest] rules (score: 1): Author: Bill Tippett <btippett@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Wed, 04 Jun 2008 16:31:11 -0400; K3NA: a) Does the use of a CW skimmer have a material impact on scores? b) If yes, do the award categories need to be changed in some way? What do you do if records set without Skimmer were broken *w; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-06/msg00123.html (7,193 bytes)
9. Re: [CQ-Contest] rules (score: 1): Author: <w1md@cfl.rr.com>; Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 17:06:42 -0400; But if "Skimmer" was part of the "Assisted" category then your "unassisted" record wouldn't be affected...or did I miss something in the translation? I'm assuming your 10m SBSO effort was of the unas; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-06/msg00124.html (8,857 bytes)
10. Re: [CQ-Contest] rules (score: 1): Author: "Bill Tippett" <btippett@alum.mit.edu>; Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 17:26:44 -0400; But if "Skimmer" was part of the "Assisted" category then your "unassisted" Correct, but the issue on the table is whether Skimmer constitutes assistance. Yes my records were all unassisted. I also h; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-06/msg00131.html (8,629 bytes)
11. Re: [CQ-Contest] rules (score: 1): Author: <w1md@cfl.rr.com>; Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 17:36:29 -0400; Hi Bill, Understand and agree. My premise was that skimmer would be lumped in as assisted. Frankly I think skimmer would be a big advantage over packet in that it is id'ing only those stations HEARD; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-06/msg00133.html (9,401 bytes)
12. Re: [CQ-Contest] rules (score: 1): Author: "Kerr, Prof. K.M." <k.kerr@abdn.ac.uk>; Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2008 22:54:32 +0100; Eric et al, I am not sure that the question of whether or not the skimmer has a material impact on scores is the issue? It seems to me that it is more a case of how this new technology is perceived a; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-06/msg00134.html (10,748 bytes)
13. Re: [CQ-Contest] rules (score: 1): Author: Eric Scace K3NA <eric@k3na.org>; Date: Thu, 05 Jun 2008 21:01:43 -0400; The proposal was that all scores, in every category, would disclose whether a skimmer was used during the period up to the June 2010 review. If it was determined then that skimmer had an enormous imp; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-06/msg00179.html (9,453 bytes)
14. [CQ-Contest] Rules (score: 1): Author: "James Cain" <jamesdavidcain@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2009 06:23:13 -0500; Quote from 3830: While there's certainly no love lost between ARRL and me, I think they have the right, maybe even the responsibility, to their own contest structures. After all, it's primarily U.S.; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2009-12/msg00253.html (7,559 bytes)
15. [CQ-Contest] RULES (score: 1): Author: Jorge Taboada <ea9lz@hotmail.com>; Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 19:34:33 +0000; Hi Folk. I have a question about rules and I would like to know your personal opinion, as maximum of you as possible. before to ask my question, sorry for my possible mistake, with the language. I am; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2020-03/msg00150.html (7,582 bytes)
16. Re: [CQ-Contest] RULES (score: 1): Author: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@sbelectronics.com>; Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2020 18:43:52 -0400; Jorge. I believe there was a pretty well discussed cased of a Cuban Multi Op team DQ'd in CQWW a few years back for excessive cheerleading. I can't remember the call. Ed N1UR ________________________; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2020-03/msg00156.html (8,498 bytes)
17. Re: [CQ-Contest] RULES (score: 1): Author: cosson-dimitri <cosson-dimitri@bbox.fr>; Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 05:17:54 +0100; Hi Jorge, <<<the cqww contest use a criterial to considering that some one did self spot, because a cheerleaders........and for this reason, the XX operator is DQ........ same criterial to DQ must be; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2020-03/msg00158.html (9,009 bytes)
18. Re: [CQ-Contest] RULES (score: 1): Author: Jorge Taboada <ea9lz@hotmail.com>; Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 19:02:42 +0000; Hi Dimitri. I understand, But I would like to know your opinion.... same criterial about cheerleaders in cqww and cqwpx? Enviado desde mi smartphone Samsung Galaxy. Hi Jorge, <<< the cqww contest use; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2020-03/msg00162.html (9,376 bytes)
19. Re: [CQ-Contest] RULES (score: 1): Author: Jorge Taboada <ea9lz@hotmail.com>; Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 19:04:13 +0000; Hi Ed. But I would like to know your opinion..... same criterial about cheerleaders in cqww and cqwpx? 73s Jorge EA9LZ EF9Z Enviado desde mi smartphone Samsung Galaxy. Jorge. I believe there was a pr; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2020-03/msg00163.html (9,605 bytes)
20. Re: [CQ-Contest] RULES (score: 1): Author: Edward Sawyer <EdwardS@sbelectronics.com>; Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2020 15:27:48 -0400; Jorge. I have not seen a DQ for cheerleading in WPX that I can remember. Others may have thoughts. Hi Ed. But I would like to know your opinion..... same criterial about cheerleaders in cqww and cqwp; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2020-03/msg00164.html (9,799 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2]