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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[VHFcontesting\]\s+POLL\s*$/: 40 ]

Total 40 documents matching your query.

21. [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: "frank bechdoldt" <k3uhf@hotmail.com>; Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2006 21:39:27 -0800; I think the poll was a nice idea and was as close to scientific as we are going to get in a hobby lime this. However the results could be misleading. I counted with matches (so i might be off a coupl; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-11/msg00003.html (8,629 bytes)
22. Re: [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: "Ron Hooper" <w4wa@alltel.net>; Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2006 08:24:29 -0500; Frank I agree with you on the fact that we can not expect ARRL to do much if anything to address certain contest rule changes mentioned in the survey. We have been through many of the survey issues; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-11/msg00004.html (7,623 bytes)
23. Re: [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: curtis roseman <croseman@usc.edu>; Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2006 08:55:58 -0600; Contesters: Just a reminder that the survey is not based on a random sample. The respondents were self-selected, not randomly selected. Therefore, one of the biases in this survey might be the result; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-11/msg00005.html (10,299 bytes)
24. Re: [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: "frank bechdoldt" <k3uhf@hotmail.com>; Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2006 08:28:55 -0800; or perhaps cq magazine? _________________________________________________________________ Add a Yahoo! contact to Windows Live Messenger for a chance to win a free trip! http://www.imagine-windowsliv; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-11/msg00006.html (9,269 bytes)
25. Re: [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: "frank bechdoldt" <k3uhf@hotmail.com>; Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2006 08:44:42 -0800; That is pretty much correct, but there is no way to randomly question us. The positive thing about it is that it was posted on all the known reflectors for responses by those who cared. Perhaps its m; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-11/msg00007.html (12,435 bytes)
26. Re: [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: Dan_K9ZF <n9rla@yahoo.com>; Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2006 11:56:49 -0500; That goes along with what I was saying. Many of the comments pointed out "weak" spots in the poll. I would like the comments used to build a better poll. I think change is inevitable. I just hope our; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-11/msg00008.html (7,745 bytes)
27. Re: [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: Frank Brickle <brickle@pobox.com>; Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2006 12:00:43 -0500; AMSAT Eagle is being designed with a fairly powerful text-messaging facility to be accessible with a minimal ground station. That facility could probably be used for rover and portable scoring update; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-11/msg00009.html (7,737 bytes)
28. Re: [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: "frank bechdoldt" <k3uhf@hotmail.com>; Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2006 11:13:58 -0800; is that geosycronis? I know I spelled that wrong..... even if the rover and portable cant be real time I imagine they would be in a differnt class than the home station. _____________________________; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-11/msg00010.html (9,152 bytes)
29. Re: [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: Frank Brickle <brickle@pobox.com>; Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2006 14:46:28 -0500; Nope. But the goal is to have it accessible over most of its orbit, and it's effectively a store-and-forward system with offline retrieval. The idea is also to have more than one, eventually, so that; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-11/msg00011.html (8,402 bytes)
30. Re: [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: KA6AMD <ka6amd@earthlink.net>; Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2006 17:05:48 -0800; While the ARRL might like to discontinue contesting, I think that their advertisers wouldn't let them. Who is it that buys the $20k tranceivers, the 120 ft towers, and the 2kW amps? Usually it is con; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-11/msg00012.html (9,496 bytes)
31. Re: [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: "Ron Hooper" <w4wa@alltel.net>; Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2006 07:19:17 -0500; Hi Erich I think the CQ VHF contest has increased in activity the last few years. The CQ DX contest is currently more popular than the ARRL DX contest. I think this proves that we already have succe; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-11/msg00014.html (9,141 bytes)
32. Re: [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: Dan_K9ZF <n9rla@yahoo.com>; Date: Sun, 05 Nov 2006 09:32:45 -0500; The biggest change I would like to see is adding a few thousand new contesters here in the Midwest! 73 Dan -- K9ZF /R no budget Rover **QRP-l #1269 Check out the Rover Resource Page at: <http://www.q; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-11/msg00015.html (8,118 bytes)
33. Re: [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: "Kenneth E. Harker" <kenharker@kenharker.com>; Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2006 08:03:06 -0800; Of all the solutions to VHF contesting's problems I've seen, this is the first time I've seen someone suggest socializing contest logging software. Why don't we just make the contest sponsors supply; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-11/msg00016.html (9,132 bytes)
34. Re: [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: "David" <ke4yyd@gtcom.net>; Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2006 17:57:50 -0500; I believe distance should be calculated into scores. CW is proven to be the long distance mode so no need to give extra credit for both. I believe extra points for the higher bands is non productive; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-11/msg00018.html (11,008 bytes)
35. Re: [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: "Ron Hooper" <w4wa@alltel.net>; Date: Sun, 5 Nov 2006 19:26:33 -0500; Ken I think you misunderstood my intention from your reply. Please interchange your wording from Socialized to Open Source. Open Source software allows many people to have access to the program code; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-11/msg00019.html (10,338 bytes)
36. Re: [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: Tree <tree@kkn.net>; Date: Mon, 6 Nov 2006 10:02:01 -0800; It seems to me that any scoring changes could be made without any changes to the logging software. Sure, the number that appears on the screen might not be your actual score total - but none of the; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-11/msg00025.html (9,959 bytes)
37. [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: "frank bechdoldt" <k3uhf@hotmail.com>; Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 17:50:56 -0800; Jim In an earlier post you said we dont have rovers who do that on the west coast because Texas isnt on the west coast. You implied and I state that they did it in Texas. It is hard to go to someplac; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-11/msg00059.html (11,293 bytes)
38. Re: [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: "Jim Forsyth" <mail@jimforsyth.com>; Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 18:15:49 -0800; Well I guess you could level a similar allegation against me. I made a deliberate decision to operate from my home QTH in California instead of moving somewhere back East where I could work a lot mor; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-11/msg00061.html (8,562 bytes)
39. [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: "frank bechdoldt" <k3uhf@hotmail.com>; Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2006 21:10:21 -0800; "Your assertion is absurd and once again you are incorrect. They made a deliberate decision to go to a place that much study had revealed would make it possible to visit the greatest number of grids; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2006-11/msg00067.html (11,927 bytes)
40. [VHFcontesting] poll (score: 1): Author: frank bechdoldt <k3uhf@hotmail.com>; Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 20:27:01 -0700; Well Nate, Im unsure if that was 280 rovers or out of 280 responses. I may be wrong on the exact percentage. It is definitely unscientific and the poll had other issues as well. The problem I have is; /archives//html/VHFcontesting/2009-05/msg00362.html (8,750 bytes)

Current List: 21 - 40
Page: [1] [2]