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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+Cheating\s*$/: 76 ]

Total 76 documents matching your query.

1. [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1): Author: "DickT-W0RAA" <dickt@w0raa.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 10:16:31 -0600; Hi Don. I read your e-mail about the cheating and the SO2R op that was running on 2 bands at once. It seems that it's getting more blatant as each contest comes along. The mood seems to be "To hell w; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00171.html (7,248 bytes)
2. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1): Author: Cheryl Whitlock <cherwhit@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 11:31:08 -0500; Don and all, Cheating is one of the reasons I do not like SO2R. That is bad enough, but it ties up too many frequencies on already crowded bands on contests weekends as well. I don't see things chang; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00172.html (7,326 bytes)
3. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1): Author: Kok Chen <chen@mac.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 10:32:41 -0700; If I were Don, I would quietly report the call sign to the contest sponsors. The log checker (didn't Eddie use to jokingly call them log chequers? :-) may be able to legitimately nit pick his log to; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00177.html (7,720 bytes)
4. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1): Author: James Colville <jimw7ry@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 10:36:22 -0700; Agreed Cheryl! I think SO2R should be in a class by itself. IN ALL CONTESTES... Or lump it together with some multi class. 73 Jim W7RY _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing lis; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00178.html (8,048 bytes)
5. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:13:24 -0400; No! When used properly SO2R is nothing more than a way to change bands quickly. If the operator has the hardware and skill to to that legally there is nothing wrong with SO2R. If the operator lacks; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00180.html (10,162 bytes)
6. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1): Author: Cheryl Whitlock <cherwhit@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 15:19:33 -0500; I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep other operators off both of them. Regardless which of the two frequencies I try, I will get told the frequency is in use.; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00182.html (9,022 bytes)
7. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1): Author: "Martin Bluhm" <marty@w8aks.us>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 13:23:53 -0800; Sorry Joe, but have to disagree with you on this one up to a point. On the cheating angle, I have to agree. This horse was ridden very hard and hung up soaking wet a few months back. My feelings towa; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00183.html (11,515 bytes)
8. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1): Author: "Mike Mellinger WA0SXV" <wa0sxv@mellinger.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 15:23:31 -0500; Geez -- could we just skip the annual multi-hundred message SO2R debate? I respectfully disagree Joe. SO2R operators sit on both frequencies and keep other operators off both of them. Regardless whic; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00184.html (8,494 bytes)
9. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1): Author: Cheryl Whitlock <cherwhit@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 15:27:41 -0500; Mike, You do have a delete key on your keyboard, right? On Mon, Jun 14, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Mike Mellinger WA0SXV <wa0sxv@mellinger.com _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00185.html (8,169 bytes)
10. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:32:33 -0400; That's correct they're switching back and forth quickly enough that there is no "down time" on either frequency. A LEGAL SO2R operator will still not transmit on both frequencies at the same time but; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00186.html (10,034 bytes)
11. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:47:00 -0400; Marty, Like you I'm tired of the semi-annual attack on SO2R operators and those who use every alleged instance of cheating as a pretense to attack SO2R. And the answer to that is "so what?" Nowhere e; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00188.html (12,815 bytes)
12. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:22:42 -0400; There is no contest that has a "multi-transmitter" class for single operators. Even for multi-operator classes the class is based on the number of simultaneous SIGNALS not the number of transmitters; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00190.html (15,857 bytes)
13. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1): Author: James Colville <jimw7ry@gmail.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 14:35:22 -0700; Sounds like there needs to be... After this last weekend. Stop the class warfare... Make SO2R a separate class. 73 Jim W7RY _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@cont; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00191.html (17,514 bytes)
14. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1): Author: Michael Haack <mikehaack@aim.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 16:49:36 -0500; There is no way a Single Op, with a Single transmitter should be up against SO2R. Sure someone can come up with a blackbox to keep only one signal on air at any given time, but still you have the dis; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00193.html (7,731 bytes)
15. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1): Author: "John Barber GW4SKA" <ska@bartg.org.uk>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 22:40:43 +0100; Absolutely on the nail, Joe. Let's keep it clear. If someone is cheating in a contest, in any way, regardless of how many radios they have or what colour shirt they wear, report them to the contest m; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00195.html (12,528 bytes)
16. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 18:39:20 -0400; "There is no way that someone with a trap vertical and a low wire should be up against those with stacks of monobanders on multiple towers. The station with multiple monoband stacks has an advantage; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00196.html (8,953 bytes)
17. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1): Author: "John KLim" <n3khk_jk@verizon.net>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 18:55:22 -0400; Just a joke friends. If the station using "stacks of monobanders on multiple Towers" is running QRP and the station using "trap vertical and a low wire" is running 15KW they might be able to out scor; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00197.html (8,678 bytes)
18. Re: [RTTY] cheating (score: 1): Author: Michael Haack <mikehaack@aim.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 18:10:41 -0500; Joe, If you can sit there and honestly tell this group that an SO2R station does not have a distinct advantage, Fine. Then you would have no objection to a Single Operator, Single Transmitter Rule. C; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00198.html (8,408 bytes)
19. Re: [RTTY] Cheating (score: 1): Author: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 17:49:59 -0600; Not all SO2 ops do this and there are lots of frequencies especially on CW. CC Packet Cluster W0MU-1 W0MU.NET or 67.40.148.194 "A slip of the foot you may soon recover, but a slip of the tongue you m; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00203.html (10,834 bytes)
20. Re: [RTTY] cheating (score: 1): Author: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <lists@subich.com>; Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:51:35 -0400; I'm not saying that it is not an advantage although there are single radio stations that regularly outscore two radio stations. A big part of the difference is still operator skill - a skilled opera; /archives//html/RTTY/2010-06/msg00204.html (11,345 bytes)

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