Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[SECC\]\s+OK\,\s+what\s+did\s+you\s+guys\s+do\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[SECC\]\s+OK\,\s+what\s+did\s+you\s+guys\s+do\?\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [SECC] OK, what did you guys do? (score: 1): Author: aa4lr at arrl.net (Bill Coleman); Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 19:35:26 -0400; I've been busy at work and haven't kept up with the goings-on on the SECC reflector. That's the beauty of an e-mail reflector -- one can catch up with the activity when one has the time. So, I really; /archives//html/SECC/2005-04/msg00292.html (7,088 bytes)
2. [SECC] OK, what did you guys do? (score: 1): Author: aldermant at alltel.net (Tommy); Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 21:36:40 -0400; Bill, This is not a 'personal' shot, but having read all of the SECC post over the past three weeks or longer, I think this one is the most mis-guided post I've read. Since the SECC use's the reflect; /archives//html/SECC/2005-04/msg00294.html (7,992 bytes)
3. [SECC] OK, what did you guys do? (score: 1): Author: k4wi at earthlink.net (Courtney Judd K4WI); Date: Sun, 24 Apr 2005 21:31:47 -0500; Well Bill, as per your email I have examined my behavior and my on line messages and find nothing wrong with them and see no reason to self-censure my self in any way. In the interest of generating n; /archives//html/SECC/2005-04/msg00295.html (6,548 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]