Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TRLog\]\s+Handling\s+of\s+\"\?\"\s+at\s+end\s+of\s+call\s+sign\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TRLog\]\s+Handling\s+of\s+\"\?\"\s+at\s+end\s+of\s+call\s+sign\s*$/: 6 ]

Total 6 documents matching your query.

1. [TRLog] Handling of "?" at end of call sign (score: 1): Author: n4gn@n4gn.com (Tim Totten, N4GN); Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 23:25:08 -0500 (EST); Here's another small addition to the wish list. Hope I haven't hit my lifetime limit yet! :-) Actually, this is such a minor annoyance it might be more trouble to explain than it's worth. But I'm hop; /archives//html/TRLog/2001-12/msg00127.html (11,669 bytes)
2. [TRLog] Handling of "?" at end of call sign (score: 1): Author: kl7ra@ptialaska.net (KL7RA); Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 22:04:35 -0800; Tim, you are about 1000+ behind me, I'm by far the most overasking customer Tree has. I'm sure he's sorry he sold me version 1.1. Too late now, too late. -Lots cut: I did, I think, and I solve it by; /archives//html/TRLog/2001-12/msg00128.html (8,423 bytes)
3. [TRLog] Handling of "?" at end of call sign (score: 1): Author: swca@swbell.net (Mark Beckwith); Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 08:28:35 -0600; Not only did I follow it, but I agree completely. This would be a great thing. If you got the call right but weren't sure, and you added a ? because you wanted him to know you weren't sure, and he se; /archives//html/TRLog/2001-12/msg00132.html (7,938 bytes)
4. [TRLog] Handling of "?" at end of call sign (score: 1): Author: Mirko Sibilja" <s57ad@amis.net (Mirko Sibilja); Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 02:15:45 +0100; HI all, with statement set to CALLSIGN UPDATE ENABLE = TRUE, in case of doubts mentioned, I write complete corrected callsign into exchange window (although it slows you down a bit). I think that *co; /archives//html/TRLog/2001-12/msg00133.html (9,487 bytes)
5. [TRLog] Handling of "?" at end of call sign (score: 1): Author: kg5u@hal-pc.org (Dale L Martin); Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 18:31:28 -0600; Why would one need to delete the ? at all? The software could probably be coded to do so. If the ? prompts the station to repeat his/her call and it's good, then no callsign in the exchange field sh; /archives//html/TRLog/2001-12/msg00137.html (8,911 bytes)
6. [TRLog] Handling of "?" at end of call sign (score: 1): Author: dl2zav@darc.de (Udo DL2ZAV); Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2001 00:21:17 +0100; I'm quite satisfied with TR not letting me log the QSO as long as there is a ? in the call. Do you want to trade the risk of a busted call for that tiny rate increase? I think KL7RA has the right sol; /archives//html/TRLog/2001-12/msg00145.html (8,673 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 6
Page: [1]