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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[SECC\]\s+GQP\s+re\-defined\s*$/: 16 ]

Total 16 documents matching your query.

1. [SECC] GQP re-defined (score: 1): Author: nq4i at contesting.com (Rick Dougherty NQ4I); Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 14:19:14 -0500; I want to clarify my previous posting seeking operators for the GQP...I received an off reflector e-mail stating that a M-M had no place as a participant in the GQP...and that the other M-M's would n; /archives//html/SECC/2007-12/msg00087.html (9,270 bytes)
2. [SECC] GQP re-defined (score: 1): Author: w4dd at arrl.net (Jeff W4DD); Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 19:26:00 -0500; I'd rather have NQ4I in the MM category (rather than a single op). It would not be easy to compete against those antennas !!! As to the success of the GQP, I think Mike and his team are on the way to; /archives//html/SECC/2007-12/msg00089.html (10,088 bytes)
3. [SECC] GQP re-defined (score: 1): Author: ku8e at bellsouth.net (ku8e at bellsouth.net); Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:49:54 +0000; I think I mentioned this before but didn't hear back any comments. Why not make NQ4I (or W4AN - if they use that call) as the official club station of the GQP sponsor, which is the SECC. You would ge; /archives//html/SECC/2007-12/msg00091.html (7,444 bytes)
4. [SECC] GQP re-defined (score: 1): Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 10:47:53 -0500; I think I mentioned this before but didn't hear back any comments. Why not make NQ4I (or W4AN - if they use that call) as the official club station of the GQP sponsor, which is the SECC. You would ge; /archives//html/SECC/2007-12/msg00092.html (7,778 bytes)
5. [SECC] GQP re-defined (score: 1): Author: dbmcalpine at earthlink.net (Dennis McAlpine); Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 10:55:04 -0500 (GMT-05:00); An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.contesting.com/pipermail/secc/attachments/20071217/11ba2091/attachment.htm; /archives//html/SECC/2007-12/msg00093.html (6,967 bytes)
6. [SECC] GQP re-defined (score: 1): Author: RadioIR at charter.net (K4SAV); Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 10:28:15 -0600; According to the GQP rules there are prizes for Rover Multi-op class, however there is no Rover Multi-op class listed, only Multi-op, which places multi-op Rovers and fixed station multi-op in the sa; /archives//html/SECC/2007-12/msg00094.html (6,962 bytes)
7. [SECC] GQP re-defined (score: 1): Author: k4bai at worldnet.att.net (John Laney); Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:37:58 -0500; But the "normal stations" are not competing against the M/M station in GQP. They are competing only against stations in their class. If NQ4I (W4AN) is QRV M/M, that just gives them one more GA QSO to; /archives//html/SECC/2007-12/msg00095.html (7,783 bytes)
8. [SECC] GQP re-defined (score: 1): Author: k4bai at worldnet.att.net (John Laney); Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:40:42 -0500; My suspicion is that the SC SM wrote the rules for the SC QSO Party. Maybe the petition would be that it be turned over to someone who knows about state QSO parties. He doesn't. 161, John.; /archives//html/SECC/2007-12/msg00096.html (6,865 bytes)
9. [SECC] GQP re-defined (score: 1): Author: Ny4n at aol.com (Ny4n at aol.com); Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:03:50 EST; I have no opinion on this one way or the other, but we do this in the Tennessee Qso Party. The Flagship station of the TCG is K4TCG. Every year, a group, either M/M or other, takes the call and uses; /archives//html/SECC/2007-12/msg00098.html (9,382 bytes)
10. [SECC] GQP re-defined (score: 1): Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:30:21 -0500; That's just fine, and that wasn't my point. My point is we should think a little about what we are proposing and try not to polarize or upset people. Things would sink to a record low if bonus point; /archives//html/SECC/2007-12/msg00099.html (9,332 bytes)
11. [SECC] GQP re-defined (score: 1): Author: w8ji at contesting.com (Tom Rauch); Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 12:35:08 -0500; Good idea. That makes sense. Allowing multiple stations to use the "special call" is a great idea, and the idea of not allowing the special call to earn any award is just how it should be. 73 Tom; /archives//html/SECC/2007-12/msg00100.html (7,225 bytes)
12. [SECC] GQP re-defined (score: 1): Author: ku8e at bellsouth.net (ku8e at bellsouth.net); Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 18:46:31 +0000; Tom and Others... I think the W4AN operation in GQP last year was the first time anyone has done a MM in the GQP. I wasn't even aware there was a plaque until I looked at the list on the webpage. I t; /archives//html/SECC/2007-12/msg00101.html (8,849 bytes)
13. [SECC] GQP re-defined (score: 1): Author: lee.hiers at gmail.com (Lee Hiers); Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:57:13 -0500; I thought that was a pretty funny comment too...guess you're an "over-the-hill" contester now, like most of us! ;-) -- Lee Hiers, AA4GA "Have Dobro Will Travel"; /archives//html/SECC/2007-12/msg00102.html (7,317 bytes)
14. [SECC] GQP re-defined (score: 1): Author: larry.k4pic at gmail.com (Larry Phillips K4PIC); Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 14:31:24 -0500; I think it is a great idea for NQ4I to be a "BONUS" station(s). Most other QSO parties have at least one bonus station. M/M on all bands is even better I think. K4PIC -- K4PIC celebrating 50 years in; /archives//html/SECC/2007-12/msg00103.html (8,260 bytes)
15. [SECC] GQP re-defined (score: 1): Author: mrcne4s at yahoo.com (Michael Condon); Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 11:51:57 -0800 (PST); Hi, I was away for the weekend, and need to catch up... We do have a RM, Rover Multi category in the rules, and separate awards for RM's. Check the rules Item 3, C. Rovers must hit 2 counties, can be; /archives//html/SECC/2007-12/msg00105.html (8,515 bytes)
16. [SECC] GQP re-defined (score: 1): Author: RadioIR at charter.net (K4SAV); Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 15:47:38 -0600; Rule 3 just says a rover can become a Multi-op as in item 3c. That's the same class as Multi-op fixed. My comment was directed toward clarifying the intent of the rules, not changing anything. The ru; /archives//html/SECC/2007-12/msg00108.html (10,759 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 16
Page: [1]