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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Sweepstakes\s+Log\s+Checking\s*$/: 9 ]

Total 9 documents matching your query.

1. Sweepstakes Log Checking (score: 1): Author: km9p@aol.com (km9p@aol.com); Date: Wed May 4 19:30:04 1994; In this year's Sweepstakes I lost about 20 QSO's on CW due to various mis-copied information. Of these 20 QSO's KR0Y lost 7 of the exact same calls for the exact same reason. I find it hard to believ; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1994-05/msg00006.html (16,165 bytes)
2. Sweepstakes Log Checking (score: 1): Author: km9p@aol.com (km9p@aol.com); Date: Thu May 5 09:24:09 1994; This would be incorrect. I busted one callsign that I know their software found. Bill; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1994-05/msg00007.html (6,292 bytes)
3. Sweepstakes Log Checking (score: 1): Author: KM9P@delphi.com (KM9P@delphi.com); Date: Fri Mar 26 09:04:47 1993; In an effort to get away from 24 hour contesting & remote amps (yawn)... Trey and I were discussing the log checking procedures and practices of the league regarding the SS recently. He pointed out t; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1993-03/msg00302.html (7,424 bytes)
4. Sweepstakes Log Checking (score: 1): Author: mraz@maverick.aud.alcatel.com (Kris Mraz); Date: Fri Mar 26 08:55:28 1993; What is the algorithm used to find a busted call? Anything I can think of will miss some bad calls and declare some good calls as bad. Kris, AA5UO '~ ~` mraz@rockdal.aud.alcatel.com L J; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1993-03/msg00306.html (6,867 bytes)
5. Sweepstakes Log Checking (score: 1): Author: 71111.260@CompuServe.COM (Hans Brakob); Date: Fri Mar 26 09:52:49 1993; Is the penalty only for only busted calls, or any error in copy? If only busted calls, what is penalty for other busted info? (I ask cuz my copy of rules is not available here at office.) My first re; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1993-03/msg00307.html (6,876 bytes)
6. Sweepstakes Log Checking (score: 1): Author: GARLOUGH@TGV.COM (Trey Garlough); Date: Fri Mar 26 07:07:23 1993; It's a secret. --Trey, WN4KKN; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1993-03/msg00309.html (6,751 bytes)
7. Sweepstakes Log Checking (score: 1): Author: montaguj@CCMSMTP.STPAUL.NCR.COM (John Montague); Date: Fri Mar 26 12:57:12 1993; Agree with consistency as a requirement for equitable treatment. Someone else asked what the algorithm is for "Busted" call determination; I too would like to know for I can think of many circumstan; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1993-03/msg00311.html (10,092 bytes)
8. FW: Sweepstakes Log Checking (score: 1): Author: TSkelton@engineer.clemsonsc.NCR.COM (Skelton, Tom); Date: Fri Mar 26 14:19:00 1993; What is the algorithm used to find a busted call? Anything I can think of will miss some bad calls and declare some good calls as bad. Kris, AA5UO '~ ~` mraz@rockdal.aud.alcatel.com L J; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1993-03/msg00313.html (7,079 bytes)
9. Sweepstakes Log Checking (score: 1): Author: tekbspa!tavan@uunet.UU.NET (tekbspa!tavan@uunet.UU.NET); Date: Fri Mar 26 14:41:32 1993; A broken call should cost you the Q. A penalty is inappropriate. Lots of broken calls might be worth a special penalty. /Rick N6XI rick@tss.com; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1993-03/msg00315.html (6,962 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 9
Page: [1]