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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+LoTW\s+confirmation\s+rates\s*$/: 5 ]

Total 5 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [RTTY] [CQ-Contest] LoTW confirmation rates (score: 1): Author: Ktfrog007@aol.com; Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 11:49:32 -0500 (EST); Hi, I should have qualified my "runs so poorly" statement, or left it out entirely as it was peripheral to my point. The uploading log-jam problem was fixed a while back and there is new TQSL softwar; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-02/msg00131.html (8,773 bytes)
2. Re: [RTTY] [CQ-Contest] LoTW confirmation rates (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>; Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 14:01:44 -0500; Someone needs to point out that the emperor [still] has no clothes. Rick, Bob and Dave have done a marvelous job rebooting Trusted QSL and expensive new hardware has restored the original rapid proce; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-02/msg00132.html (10,525 bytes)
3. Re: [RTTY] [CQ-Contest] LoTW confirmation rates (score: 1): Author: " Dave AA6YQ" <aa6yq@ambersoft.com>; Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 16:40:18 -0500; It's easy to hide a problem by spending $$$ to move it to faster hardware. To date nothing significant has been done to resolve what the LotW Advisory Committee calls LotW's "substantial technical de; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-02/msg00133.html (10,781 bytes)
4. Re: [RTTY] [CQ-Contest] LoTW confirmation rates (score: 1): Author: Ktfrog007@aol.com; Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2014 19:49:09 -0500 (EST); Hi Scott, I concur with your findings. Digital folks really like eQSL, as do I. A lot of folks seem to vehemently dislike it, but I like to see QSLs and save my favorites into a folder and run it as; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-02/msg00138.html (8,312 bytes)
5. Re: [RTTY] [CQ-Contest] LoTW confirmation rates (score: 1): Author: Stanley Zawrotny <k4sbz.stan@gmail.com>; Date: Wed, 12 Feb 2014 12:55:03 -0500; My experience with QSLs is that I have a 35% QSL rate per QSO with eQSL, 25% with LoTW and 4% with paper. Many of those are duplicates. I mostly work digital, using SSB only for contests. I am a firm; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2014-02/msg00143.html (8,404 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 5
Page: [1]