Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Why\s+no\s+mention\s+of\s+TT\?\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Why\s+no\s+mention\s+of\s+TT\?\s*$/: 14 ]

Total 14 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] Why no mention of TT? (score: 1): Author: Steve Hunt <steve@karinya.net>; Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 18:41:21 +0000; Subject says it all! http://www.edn.com/article/519742-Ham_radio_in_the_21st_century.php Steve G3TXQ _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://l; /archives//html/TenTec/2011-11/msg00195.html (9,426 bytes)
2. Re: [TenTec] Why no mention of TT? (score: 1): Author: Dalton McCrary <jdkkm@bellsouth.net>; Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 11:01:41 -0800 (PST); That is a very good question. I saw that yesterday and wondered the same thing. 73, Dalton - W4WUQ Subject says it all! http://www.edn.com/article/519742-Ham_radio_in_the_21st_century.php Steve G3TX; /archives//html/TenTec/2011-11/msg00196.html (10,591 bytes)
3. Re: [TenTec] Why no mention of TT? (score: 1): Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>; Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 14:56:49 -0500; Nuts. Does not mean anything. You are reading into it more than appears warranted by the text, reaching your own conclusions for reasons not stated in the text. They did not mention everyone. So he s; /archives//html/TenTec/2011-11/msg00198.html (10,567 bytes)
4. Re: [TenTec] Why no mention of TT? (score: 1): Author: "Fabrizio iz2kxc" <iz2kxc@tiscali.it>; Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 21:06:35 +0100; Maybe they haven't paid for advertising, Don't you? 73 Fabrizio IZ2KXC N2DN iz2kxc@tiscali.it iz2kxc@arrl.net iz2kxc@wia.org.au -- Original Message -- From: "Dalton McCrary" <jdkkm@bellsouth.net> To:; /archives//html/TenTec/2011-11/msg00199.html (11,508 bytes)
5. Re: [TenTec] Why no mention of TT? (score: 1): Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>; Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 16:00:54 -0500; Geeze... re-reading this it sounds too argumentative... not my intention. Sorry if this came off a bit heavy-handed. -- JHR -- _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenT; /archives//html/TenTec/2011-11/msg00205.html (10,891 bytes)
6. Re: [TenTec] Why no mention of TT? (score: 1): Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>; Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 16:59:10 -0500; HERE IS THE REPLY I RECEIVED FROM AUTHOR DOUG GRANT CONFIRMING MY OBSERVATION ON WHY TT WAS NOT MENTIONED... NOW FELLERS... Don't we have enough problems promoting TT gear without imposing our own li; /archives//html/TenTec/2011-11/msg00207.html (13,253 bytes)
7. Re: [TenTec] Why no mention of TT? (score: 1): Author: "Tom Frank" <tafrank@sbcglobal.net>; Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 16:15:33 -0600; Hello Merle, Thanks for your E mail and hopefully all is well. I've put the info on 9N7MD into my "favorites." I hope that I will have the need to use their online log as I have not worked them yet.; /archives//html/TenTec/2011-11/msg00209.html (15,093 bytes)
8. Re: [TenTec] Why no mention of TT? (score: 1): Author: Steve Hunt <steve@karinya.net>; Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 22:33:27 +0000; I'm still no wiser :) What was his reason for omitting mention of TT? Steve G3TXQ _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com; /archives//html/TenTec/2011-11/msg00211.html (14,430 bytes)
9. Re: [TenTec] Why no mention of TT? (score: 1): Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>; Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 18:37:57 -0500; He was giving a brief overview of ham radio, and was not making a complete or comprehensive listing of every manufacturer. He mentioned newcomers, like Elecraft, but did not mention all the older, es; /archives//html/TenTec/2011-11/msg00217.html (10,819 bytes)
10. Re: [TenTec] Why no mention of TT? (score: 1): Author: Richards <jruing@ameritech.net>; Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 18:41:31 -0500; OK, Steve. You got me. I plead guilty on taking things too seriously now. Re-reading your post and NOW seeing the little smiley face thingy... I can see I got suckered into making one last reply ! Oo; /archives//html/TenTec/2011-11/msg00218.html (10,550 bytes)
11. Re: [TenTec] Why no mention of TT? (score: 1): Author: Jim Brown <k9yc@audiosystemsgroup.com>; Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 17:57:10 -0800; Yes, BUT -- the author, K1DG, is a very active and well known contester, and a major reason he mentioned Elecraft is that their products have taken by storm those hams who are most interested in cutt; /archives//html/TenTec/2011-11/msg00220.html (12,126 bytes)
12. Re: [TenTec] Why no mention of TT? (score: 1): Author: Keith Hamilton <tuner@zoominternet.net>; Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 21:30:47 -0500; Can we please drop this line of discussion before it turns into a rant for each of our favorite rigs? 73 Keith N8CEP _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contest; /archives//html/TenTec/2011-11/msg00222.html (12,883 bytes)
13. Re: [TenTec] Why no mention of TT? (score: 1): Author: "Ron Notarius W3WN" <wn3vaw@verizon.net>; Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 23:22:32 -0500; The article didn't mention other major brands, just showed a few examples. I wouldn't worry about it. 73 Subject says it all! http://www.edn.com/article/519742-Ham_radio_in_the_21st_century.php Steve; /archives//html/TenTec/2011-11/msg00225.html (10,733 bytes)
14. Re: [TenTec] Why no mention of TT? (score: 1): Author: Keith Hamilton <tuner@zoominternet.net>; Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 00:58:49 -0500; Can we please drop this line of discussion before it turns into a rant for each of our favorite rigs? 73 Keith N8CEP _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contest; /archives//html/TenTec/2011-11/msg00226.html (12,851 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 14
Page: [1]