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

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*WPX\s+Operation\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. WPX Operation (score: 1): Author: hurta@ap040.dseg.ti.com (Dwaine Hurta); Date: Tue Jun 2 11:47:39 1992; I operated WPX at K5OJI this past weekend after not having operated it in a long time. Couldn't remember all the reasons why I didn't like it but now those reasons are fresh on my mind. Like... So ho; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1992-06/msg00013.html (7,685 bytes)
2. WPX Operation (score: 1): Author: GARLOUGH@TGV.COM (Trey Garlough); Date: Tue Jun 2 09:59:42 1992; I used to do this in the days of paper logging, but now that I am using a computer I don't bother. It is a pain. I don't think this is too likely. The people who run the contest are aware of this pr; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1992-06/msg00014.html (7,378 bytes)
3. WPX Operation (score: 1): Author: reisert@mast.enet.dec.com (Jim -- MLO3-6/B9 -- DTN 223-5747 02-Jun-1992 1430); Date: Tue Jun 2 15:25:47 1992; --Reply to mail dated 2-JUN-1992 11:55:20.89-- I personally don't like this practice either. I log everyone. What if they send you a QSL card? Do you confirm stations that aren't in your log? I worke; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1992-06/msg00018.html (7,171 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]