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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+thats\s+very\s+sad\s+Gert\s*$/: 32 ]

Total 32 documents matching your query.

21. [RTTY] thats very sad Gert (score: 1): Author: "Scott Schultz" <scottaschultz@juno.com>; Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 09:20:44 GMT; If a ham is not active, what are they doing sitting on the Board of Directors of the ARRL? The League has obviously put a tremendous amount of time and effort into LoTW. EVERY member of the Board of; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-01/msg00604.html (10,336 bytes)
22. Re: [RTTY] thats very sad Gert (score: 1): Author: <ke4qok@bellsouth.net>; Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 8:37:43 -0500; This is a good point Bob, but I have mixed feelings sometimes. It's kind of like discussing whether or not the a preacher should behave better than the congregation in general. These folks have been; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-01/msg00608.html (12,414 bytes)
23. Re: [RTTY] thats very sad Gert (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat1242@ispwest.com>; Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 08:49:16 -0800; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ More like "Fords are ok but I prefer to ride the bus". 73, Bill W6WRT _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-01/msg00610.html (8,074 bytes)
24. Re: [RTTY] thats very sad Gert (score: 1): Author: "John Geiger (NE0P)" <ne0p@lcisp.com>; Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2006 11:05:56 -0600; Or having Chip, K7JA using all Ten-Tec or Kenwood in his shack. 73s John NE0P 66.7% Yaesu in the shack ________________________________________________________________ _______________________________; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-01/msg00611.html (9,044 bytes)
25. Re: [RTTY] thats very sad Gert (score: 1): Author: Susan King <k5du@ecpi.com>(by way of Jim Reisert AD1C<jjreisert@alum.mit.edu>); Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 08:15:48 -0500; Perhaps we expect folks at the League or our elected officials to set an example for us. And, perhaps part of the problem is that we do not know what example they do set for us. While AD1C is setting; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-01/msg00624.html (9,360 bytes)
26. Re: [RTTY] thats very sad Gert (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat1242@ispwest.com>; Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 08:09:46 -0800; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ QSLing is so basic and so fundamental to Amateur Radio that all League officials should be expected to participate in LoTW. Even if; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-01/msg00626.html (8,577 bytes)
27. Re: [RTTY] thats very sad Gert (score: 1): Author: "Scott Schultz" <scottaschultz@juno.com>; Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 12:32:21 -0600; Thank you Bill! You get it. So Bob K0RC, now you can make your official tally 2 for those who think the acceptable percentage of League officials using LOTW should be 100%. I still stand by my statem; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-01/msg00632.html (9,172 bytes)
28. Re: [RTTY] thats very sad Gert (score: 1): Author: Peter Laws <plaws0@gmail.com>; Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 13:37:06 -0600; You're confusing "ultimate control" and micromanaging. The ARRL Board doesn't need to use LoTW to judge its effectiveness (tho' it certainly wouldn't hurt) any more than the board of the company I wo; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-01/msg00634.html (9,116 bytes)
29. Re: [RTTY] thats very sad Gert (score: 1): Author: Bill Turner <dezrat1242@ispwest.com>; Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 11:54:46 -0800; ORIGINAL MESSAGE: Probably not. Do you think 10 GHz has the same importance in the Scheme of Things as LoTW? I don't. LoTW is a biggie, or should be. 10 GHz could vanish and few people would notice o; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-01/msg00635.html (8,634 bytes)
30. Re: [RTTY] thats very sad Gert (score: 1): Author: "Scott Schultz" <scottaschultz@juno.com>; Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 14:52:06 -0600; doesn't need to use LoTW to judge its effectiveness (tho' it certainly wouldn't hurt) So who is going to going to tell them? The membership? Quite frankly, the folks in Newington don't exactly have t; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-01/msg00636.html (9,982 bytes)
31. Re: [RTTY] thats very sad Gert (score: 1): Author: "Doug Hall" <doug.hall@jps.com>; Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 17:41:30 -0500; Do you think 10 GHz has the same importance in the Scheme of Things as LoTW? I don't. LoTW is a biggie, or should be. 10 GHz could vanish and few people would notice or care. -- I'd care. In the Sche; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-01/msg00637.html (9,278 bytes)
32. [RTTY] thats very sad gert (score: 1): Author: DL8MBS <prickler.schneider@t-online.de>; Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2006 19:41:29 +0100; W6WRT wrote: <QSLing is so basic and so fundamental to Amateur Radio... If it were so basic and fundamental - why was there the discussion on the CQ-contest-reflector about QSLing with you and others; /archives//html/RTTY/2006-01/msg00639.html (8,818 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 32
Page: [1] [2]