Yeah, hex would definitely make it fun. Or how about making it real simple
by using Base 2?
73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
----- Original Message -----
From: "Zack Widup" <w9sz.zack@gmail.com>
To: "CQ Contest" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 11:24 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] serial numbers
Why limit it to base 10? Hexadecimal would be fun and would throw the
cut numbers users for a loop. "5NN 4DC"
49, Zack W9SZ
On Mon, Mar 15, 2010 at 6:28 PM, cwdxer <w7ot@verizon.net> wrote:
> But why limit it to real numbers? You're 59 100+j87 has a nice ring to it
> (ok, 100+i87 for those non-engineer types).
>
> And while there are an infinite number of rational numbers, what about all
> of those poor irrational numbers? You're 59 pi would be a great way to
> steal someones run frequency, it would take them FOREVER to type it into
> their log.....
>
> :-)
>
> I'm afraid to post this to the reflector since there appear to be some who
> lack the humor gene....
>
> Mike W1YM
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Zack Widup" <w9sz.zack@gmail.com>
> To: "CQ Contest" <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Sent: Monday, March 15, 2010 2:21 AM
> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] serial numbers
>
>
> Because other sequences than n+1 would be a lot more fun. How about
> factorials?
> :-)
>
> 73, Zack W9SZ
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 9:49 PM, Ron Notarius W3WN <wn3vaw@verizon.net>
> wrote:
>>
>> Progressive.
>> Sequential.
>> Incremental.
>> Consecutive.
>>
>> I should think the intention, obviously, is that you start with 1 for the
>> first QSO, 2 for the second, 3 for the 3rd, and so on.
>>
>> Such a simple concept. And yet it appears to be somewhat controversial...
>> else why would there be so much arguing about it?
>>
>> 73
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com
>> [mailto:cq-contest-bounces@contesting.com] On Behalf Of Ryan Jairam
>> Sent: Sunday, March 14, 2010 9:58 PM
>> To: N7DF
>> Cc: cq-contest@contesting.com
>> Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] serial numbers
>>
>> This is what the rules say:
>>
>> Exchange: RS(T) report plus a progressive contact serial number
>> starting with 001 for the first contact
>>
>> A progressive serial number. Is that the same as a sequential number, or
>> not?
>>
>> Ryan, N2RJ
>>
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 11:41 AM, N7DF <n7df@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have noticed that there is no requirement in the WPX rules for serial
>>
>> numbers to be sequential, only that they begin with 001
>>>
>>> Reminds me of the school kids chant "one two skip a few, forty four,
>>> skip
>>
>> some more"
>>>
>>> Nothing against foxing out the competition by skipping ahead
>>> occasionally
>>
>> to give numbers larger than them.
>>>
>>> N7DF
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Ryan A. Jairam,
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CQ-Contest mailing list
>> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
>> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|