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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[SECC\]\s+GQP\s+rule\s+chages\s+to\s+be\s+posted\s+soon\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [SECC] GQP rule chages to be posted soon (score: 1): Author: mrcne4s at yahoo.com (Michael Condon); Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 07:16:12 -0800 (PST); Hi, Earlier this year we had some discussion and consensus (mostly) on some rule changes for GQP. I reviewed these changes with Rick and Jeff, Pres/VP, and we are about to post these chages. Logging; /archives//html/SECC/2007-12/msg00020.html (10,002 bytes)
2. [SECC] GQP rule chages to be posted soon (score: 1): Author: k4bai at worldnet.att.net (John Laney); Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2007 10:55:23 -0500; I am opposed to most of the changes. If they are adopted, I will continue to support the GQP. However, there is something to be said for stability of rules, making all-time records meaningful, for no; /archives//html/SECC/2007-12/msg00021.html (8,089 bytes)
3. [SECC] GQP rule chages to be posted soon (score: 1): Author: SavageBR at aol.com (SavageBR at aol.com); Date: Thu, 6 Dec 2007 11:22:18 EST; I agree with most all of the comments from John, K4BAI. I would also like to see a condition added to the GQP date definition that would move it plus or minus one or two weeks when it falls on Easter; /archives//html/SECC/2007-12/msg00023.html (7,023 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]