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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*Topband\:\s+QSL\:s\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. Topband: QSL:s (score: 1): Author: calle.jonsson@sverige.nu; Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 16:40:08 +0100 (CET); I looked into my log from 2006 until today. What I found out was that DL stns are almost QSLing 100%, but Stateside stations only about 5% (!). The question is: are the qsl-bureaus very slow or am I; /archives//html/Topband/2009-02/msg00129.html (6,558 bytes)
2. Re: Topband: QSL:s (score: 1): Author: "Luis Mansutti IV3PRK" <luisprk@tin.it>; Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 17:48:58 +0100; I looked into my log from 2006 until today. What I found out was that DL stns are almost QSLing 100%, but Stateside stations only about 5% (!). The question is: are the qsl-bureaus very slow or am I; /archives//html/Topband/2009-02/msg00130.html (7,937 bytes)
3. Re: Topband: QSL:s (score: 1): Author: wb6rse1@mac.com; Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 16:01:15 -0800; I looked into my log from 2006 until today. What I found out was that DL stns are almost QSLing 100%, but Stateside stations only about 5% (!). _________ You don't mention whether those numbers refle; /archives//html/Topband/2009-02/msg00132.html (7,807 bytes)
4. Re: Topband: QSL:s (score: 1): Author: Joe Giacobello <k2xx@swva.net>; Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 19:09:01 -0500; cards which could have led to delays in answering received QSLs. I know for certain that the X** suffixes were involved. It's possible that there may have been others. To the best of my knowledge, th; /archives//html/Topband/2009-02/msg00141.html (8,720 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]