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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+self\s+spotting\s*$/: 134 ]

Total 134 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: "Jamie Dupree" <ns3t@arrl.net>; Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 20:13:05 -0500; After reading K1TTT's latest tome on self spotters, I decided to do a check on my call to see if anyone had "used" it to spot themselves in some of the recent contests....and sure enough, the winner; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-03/msg00553.html (10,035 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: "Tom Osborne" <w7why@charter.net>; Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 19:24:07 -0800; If everybody knows who is doing the cheating, why don't the sponsers do something about it? Tom W7WHY -- The world's top contesters battle it out in Finland! THE OFFICIAL FILM of WRTC 2002 now on pr; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-03/msg00554.html (8,481 bytes)
3. RE: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: "Rex Lint" <rex@lint.mv.com>; Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 05:44:51 -0500; Maybe we should just accept this as a new way of calling cq... Rex Lint, K1HI After reading K1TTT's latest tome on self spotters, I decided to do a check on my call to see if anyone had "used" it to; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-03/msg00555.html (11,253 bytes)
4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <wrt@dslextreme.com>; Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 08:10:27 -0800; _________________________________________________________ Or maybe we should just outlaw packet entirely during contests. What does it really add to the contesting experience anyway? Just think: Find; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-03/msg00559.html (9,155 bytes)
5. RE: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: "Barry Merrill" <barry@mxg.com>; Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 12:59:34 -0600; During the WPX-SSB, I Worked Spots Only, and only non-USA stations to give them the high-point contacts, in the seventeen hours I had to play. At least 100 QSOs of my 700 Qs would never have happened; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-03/msg00560.html (10,934 bytes)
6. [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: "Ken Claerbout" <k4zw@hotmail.com>; Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 17:52:00 +0000; ?If everybody knows who is doing the cheating? Do we really? I think we need to be a little careful with our assumptions. For example, consider ?cheerleading spots." In some instances so called cheer; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-03/msg00561.html (9,985 bytes)
7. RE: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: "Dale Martin" <kg5u@hal-pc.org>; Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 18:24:45 -0600; Barry, if you feel that CQ'ing stations should be penalized, why not just not work them? Wouldn't that be a lot simpler? But, wait! If you don't work the CQ'ing stations, you won't have anyone to wo; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-03/msg00562.html (9,345 bytes)
8. RE: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: "Barry Merrill" <barry@mxg.com>; Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 22:01:40 -0600; I'm not penalizing broadcast stations that sit on one frequency making 100 Q's per hour; their year-to-year scoring would not be changed. I'm suggesting that non-CQing stations should receive 2x poin; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-03/msg00563.html (9,026 bytes)
9. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: "S. Markowski Jr." <km9m-zig@comcast.net>; Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 12:01:59 +0000; Here we go again...................... I vote leave ALL the contests the way they are....... If we ALL want to win, or level the scoreboard, you need to spend the money, have the location, and pay yo; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-03/msg00564.html (9,709 bytes)
10. RE: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: k1ttt@arrl.net; Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 07:04:48 -0500 (EST); could i get 1.5x the points for cqing on one vfo and working spots on the other?? what about stations with 2 radios on a band, would they only get 1x the points for the cqing radio and 2x for the s&p; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-03/msg00565.html (10,232 bytes)
11. RE: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: W0UN -- John Brosnahan <shr@swtexas.net>; Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 07:54:42 -0600; I'm suggesting that non-CQing stations should receive 2x points for those contacts, because S&P rates are one half of the run rates. Barry-- I don't think what you propose works in social engineering; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-03/msg00568.html (11,136 bytes)
12. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: "Nat Heatwole" <nat@ajheatwole.com>; Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 12:51:22 -0500; It seems that you've found a positive use for packet, Barry. But the fact is that the majority of packet users, especially those operating seriously and full-time do not use packet in this same way.; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-03/msg00578.html (10,518 bytes)
13. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: <ku8e@bellsouth.net>; Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 16:42:29 -0500; Here we go again...................... I vote leave ALL the contests the way they are....... If we ALL want to win, or level the scoreboard, you need to spend the money, have the location, and pay yo; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-03/msg00582.html (10,327 bytes)
14. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: Tim Duffy K3LR <k3lr@k3lr.com>; Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2004 11:16:41 -0600; This is not true, the largest DX contest has enforced packet use on many occasions during the past several years. A little research into claimed category vs. published (final results) category for se; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-04/msg00010.html (11,942 bytes)
15. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: "Barry " <w2up@mindspring.com>; Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2004 19:50:02 -0000; Yes and no, Tim. Moving someone from one category to another is correcting an error. Disqualifying, identifying and/or penalizing those individuals is enforcing a rule. 73, Barry W2UP -- Barry Kutner; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-04/msg00017.html (13,765 bytes)
16. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com; Date: Thu, 1 Apr 2004 20:23:31 EST; In a message dated 4/1/04 5:47:11 PM Greenwich Standard Time, barry@mxg.com writes: Throwing money at towers and amps and multiple radios so you can broadcast CQ 6 times a minute; where's the operato; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-04/msg00023.html (11,431 bytes)
17. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: K3BU@aol.com; Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 00:58:41 EST; busted our asses in research, scavenging materials, and homebrewed lots of stuff. That, takes lots of skill. We then invested more in researching past scores to know where to put our efforts in a giv; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-04/msg00024.html (9,830 bytes)
18. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: Doug Smith W9WI <w9wi@earthlink.net>; Date: 02 Apr 2004 08:09:34 -0600; Does the existence of this thread suggest that simply reclassifying the offending stations isn't enough? When the results come out and W9WI shows up as #4 SOA instead of #7 SO, who except W9WI is goi; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-04/msg00030.html (10,558 bytes)
19. RE: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: <jukka.klemola@nokia.com>; Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 22:33:27 +0300; Idea warmly supported from springly, sunny Finland. 73, jukka OH6LI -- The world's top contesters battle it out in Finland! THE OFFICIAL FILM of WRTC 2002 now on professional DVD and VHS! http://home; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-04/msg00043.html (9,227 bytes)
20. Re: [CQ-Contest] Self Spotting (score: 1): Author: "Ron Notarius WN3VAW" <wn3vaw@fyi.net>; Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2004 16:06:54 -0500; Yuri, That's a rather harsh sentiment. There are many skilled or semi-skilled contesters who for one of any number of reasons is borrowing or "renting" a shack; for example: -- Some of us are tempora; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2004-04/msg00044.html (12,346 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]