- 1. [SECC] Re: W4 QSO Party ? (score: 1)
- Author: aa4lr@arrl.net (Bill Coleman)
- Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 07:56:48 -0400
- A general accord between the times and rules would be helpful. (The important thing is that the rules be the same for out-of-state participants) However, not everything has to be identical. For examp
- /archives//html/SECC/2001-08/msg00007.html (7,293 bytes)
- 2. [SECC] Re: W4 QSO Party ? (score: 1)
- Author: k4bai@worldnet.att.net (John Laney)
- Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 16:12:53 -0400
- SC hasn't had a QSO Party in many years. It was run by a Columbus native ham who was living in Charleston, SC at the time. When her husband died, she returned to Columbus and is now a silent key. I o
- /archives//html/SECC/2001-08/msg00012.html (8,953 bytes)
- 3. [SECC] Re: W4 QSO Party ? (score: 1)
- Author: K4BAI@worldnet.att.net (John Laney)
- Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 02:46:24 +0000
- This has also been done before. It was run by W4OMW and his club in NC every year until he died. Thing about it is that the states continued to have their own QSO Parties....at least AL, FL, VA, and
- /archives//html/SECC/2001-07/msg00143.html (9,960 bytes)
- 4. [SECC] Re: W4 QSO Party ? (score: 1)
- Author: w4an@contesting.com (Bill Fisher W4AN)
- Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2001 23:18:50 -0400 (EDT)
- So again, just because it failed in the past... doesn't mean it will fail in the future. I don't know W4OWM or his club, and God rest his soul. But maybe he wasn't the right guy for the job? Plenty o
- /archives//html/SECC/2001-07/msg00145.html (9,337 bytes)
- 5. [SECC] Re: W4 QSO Party ? (score: 1)
- Author: k4sb@mindspring.com (Ed)
- Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 19:48:54 +0000
- I think the idea of multiple States in one party would just be a little too much, especially if the rules were not exactly the same. I would much rather do a GA/AL or GA/SC ( or both ) 73 Ed -- SECC
- /archives//html/SECC/2001-07/msg00158.html (8,264 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu