Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[VHFcontesting\]\s+Concerning\s+Tilton\'s\s+Rule\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[VHFcontesting\]\s+Concerning\s+Tilton\'s\s+Rule\s*$/: 13 ]

Total 13 documents matching your query.

1. [VHFcontesting] Concerning Tilton's Rule (score: 1): Author: Marshall Williams <k5qe@sabinenet.com>; Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 20:30:51 -0600; Hello again to the VHF contesters on the list.... A month or so ago when I posted my first thoughts on this, I made a point of following a careful definition of what constitutes a valid VHF contact.; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2009-03/msg00053.html (10,491 bytes)
2. Re: [VHFcontesting] Concerning Tilton's Rule (score: 1): Author: Ray J <Ray@w9ray.org>; Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 22:14:47 -0500; the '08 UHF contest rules clearly states 4. Exchange: Grid-square locater 6. Miscellaneous: 1. 6.1 Partial QSOs do not count. Both callsigns, full exchanges and acknowledgment must be sent and receiv; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2009-03/msg00054.html (9,080 bytes)
3. Re: [VHFcontesting] Concerning Tilton's Rule (score: 1): Author: Paul Kiesel <k7cw@yahoo.com>; Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 23:41:09 -0700 (PDT); Hi Marshall, I applaud you for your positive approaches to the betterment of VHF contesting and operating in general. I respectfully disagree with you regarding "what constitutes a VHF QSO." As I men; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2009-03/msg00057.html (14,822 bytes)
4. Re: [VHFcontesting] Concerning Tilton's Rule (score: 1): Author: Nate Duehr <nate@natetech.com>; Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 01:10:10 -0600; Actually they do not. Think "round-table" type operations. I don't have to sign with you before handing it over to a third party on a local repeater, for example. The FCC cares naught about QSO's, on; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2009-03/msg00058.html (8,133 bytes)
5. Re: [VHFcontesting] Concerning Tilton's Rule (score: 1): Author: Nate Duehr <nate@natetech.com>; Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 01:11:05 -0600; "Inconsistency breeds contempt." :-) -- Nate Duehr, WY0X nate@natetech.com _______________________________________________ VHFcontesting mailing list VHFcontesting@contesting.com http://lists.contest; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2009-03/msg00059.html (7,915 bytes)
6. Re: [VHFcontesting] Concerning Tilton's Rule (score: 1): Author: Ron Hooper <w4wa@alltel.net>; Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 09:18:57 -0400; Hi Paul To summerize some of the responses that I have received: I think most people including myself operate with a similar format Paul described. I think most people also agree that the FCC rules A; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2009-03/msg00061.html (17,835 bytes)
7. Re: [VHFcontesting] Concerning Tilton's Rule (score: 1): Author: "Chet, N8RA" <chetsubaccount@snet.net>; Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 10:22:41 -0400; Well put Paul. I didn't see a problem needing a solution. 73 all, Chet, N8RA Hi Marshall, I applaud you for your positive approaches to the betterment of VHF contesting and operating in general. I re; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2009-03/msg00062.html (16,206 bytes)
8. Re: [VHFcontesting] Concerning Tilton's Rule (score: 1): Author: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>; Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 09:03:12 -0600; A contest exchange can be anything you want it to be. The NA Sprints require that both callsigns be sent, others require a name, grid square, favorite color, power. Sweepstakes requires a very length; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2009-03/msg00066.html (17,365 bytes)
9. Re: [VHFcontesting] Concerning Tilton's Rule (score: 1): Author: Ron Hooper <w4wa@alltel.net>; Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 11:42:48 -0400; Chet I will try to explain my perception of the contest identification issue. Some stations have figured out ways to speed up the contact rate by shortening the information that is passed. Some stati; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2009-03/msg00069.html (19,758 bytes)
10. Re: [VHFcontesting] Concerning Tilton's Rule (score: 1): Author: "Eugene Zimmerman" <ezimmerm@erols.com>; Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 12:20:50 -0400; Hi Paul and Marshall There is no real dichotomy between Tilton's original description of a contact and what contesters do. Tilton's rule dealt with really weak signals where the participants are not; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2009-03/msg00070.html (18,017 bytes)
11. Re: [VHFcontesting] Concerning Tilton's Rule (score: 1): Author: "Chet, N8RA" <chetsubaccount@snet.net>; Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 15:18:45 -0400; Ron, Thanks for the reply, but I am still struggling to see the problem. In my experience, different ops handle the contact different ways. Replies I get from a CQ might be my call once (or 3 times!; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2009-03/msg00072.html (20,159 bytes)
12. Re: [VHFcontesting] Concerning Tilton's Rule (score: 1): Author: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>; Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:43:48 -0600; While a great thought in theory it never works that way when you have new people entering the contest trying to give you points. So what if they give the information in the wrong order. It is our job; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2009-03/msg00077.html (22,456 bytes)
13. Re: [VHFcontesting] Concerning Tilton's Rule (score: 1): Author: "W0MU Mike Fatchett" <w0mu@w0mu.com>; Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:45:44 -0600; If the rules say you will send a signal report and the grid square you best do so. It station x only sends the grid. Turn them in with a recording. They should be disqualified. It they do not or will; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2009-03/msg00078.html (9,093 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 13
Page: [1]