Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:vs_otw@rogers.com: 80 ]

Total 80 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [CQ-Contest] Is it a time to change rules forHQstnsin IARUcontest (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 18:07:55 +0100
Hi all, Just another solution. Only QSOs with participants conducted at least 100 (or so) contacts in the contest are eligible for the contest score. As simple as that. 73, Vladimir VE3IAE __________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00221.html (8,137 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Is it a time to changerulesfor HQstnsin IARUcontest (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jul 2006 20:33:26 +0100
Hi Mark, All correct, it would fundamentally change the game. Let's narrow the circle. No problem if a casual operator comes and makes a couple of contacts. Fine, if he even sends a log, he can compe
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00226.html (10,747 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Cheating by M/S - 3 QSO "penalty" by K3BU (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2006 14:36:55 +0100
Gents, Is it really fair to allow the "unclaimed" QSOs in principle? An example: you and your competitor decided to jump and check another band. The band is dead but you found and worked eachother. A
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00494.html (11,572 bytes)

4. [CQ-Contest] WRTC revisiting (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 00:12:44 +0100
Gents, Isn't it time to change a subject and to touch something else? The old poor horse named SO2R vs SO1R is dead long long ago. The recent WRTC is history. People say, another one to come, so let'
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00604.html (9,849 bytes)

5. [CQ-Contest] EU1MM SK (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 16:29:03 +0100
Sad news just came about Valery Khorkov, EU1MM, who passed away today after a long illness. Undoubtfully he used to be one of the strongest RTTY contesters Worldwide. We shall miss him. RIP, Valery.
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-07/msg00622.html (6,603 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] "?" not equal to "QRL?" (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 06:19:27 -0500
This is not any kind of news for me and it is really de facto standard at least for me for contesting since 1969. To my honest suprise, it is not, for others. Besides, other things like IE, a single
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00129.html (10,924 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] Radio as Carry-On Luggage? (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 18:48:43 -0500
It looks like paddles attract some extra attention of the security people... Last April my Bencher paddle really created such a headache for me... It was a long transcontinental flight, actually, 3 o
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00233.html (9,599 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] 1966 vs 2006 [was: Why did the Canadians (PT5M)beat the Americans...] (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 17:48:43 -0500
Basic principles remain basic principles always, regardless when they are studied or analized, is it 1966 or 2006. For sure, there ARE several different layers of correspondents. And the layers depen
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00318.html (14,846 bytes)

9. [CQ-Contest] Fw: 1966 vs 2006 [was: Why did the Canadians (PT5M)beat the Americans...] (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2006 18:12:07 -0500
Sorry, certainly it looks like I have to mention that the below had place in the EU land. 73, Vladimir VE3IAE - EU1SA -- _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Con
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-08/msg00319.html (13,267 bytes)

10. Re: [CQ-Contest] Real Time Scoreboards (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 08:10:28 -0500
Please kindly consider the 2 following ideas. -- Would't it be better just to publish full contest results in 1-2 months after it's over? Virtually the interest to the online scores has come (IMO) be
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-10/msg00409.html (11,452 bytes)

11. [CQ-Contest] CQ WW rules, typo? (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Oct 2006 06:20:29 -0500
Hi all, I got a feeling, it has been touched in the list but I missed it... Is there really a typo in the rules concerning SO group or something new? qt -- III. Single Operator Cathegories. ... A. Si
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-10/msg00525.html (8,049 bytes)

12. Re: [CQ-Contest] Back When... and Phonetics again (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 10:46:27 -0500
Sorry, can't resist and turn back to the "Phonetics". Some time ago I worked a station signing "Kilowatt-<number>-<single letter>. I asked him, is it a special event station or something else. The an
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-10/msg00557.html (8,782 bytes)

13. Re: [CQ-Contest] SSB in CW band (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2006 10:25:41 -0600
The above includes a question and an answer in the same time, intentionally or not. I mean an answer to the question, how the lower Phone band edge can be enforced. The CQ WW rules require an operat
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-10/msg00632.html (9,995 bytes)

14. Re: [CQ-Contest] Spreadsheet guru? (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 00:50:17 -0000
Hans, Supposingly you worked 500 stations and all of them suggest the same as you, will you be happy to receive 500 "thank you" messages yourself? :-) 73, Vladimir VE3IAE -- "thank you" email via arr
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-11/msg00164.html (8,709 bytes)

15. Re: [CQ-Contest] Spreadsheet guru? (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2006 09:32:40 -0600
Hans, Remember, "QSL is a final courtesy of a QSO"? :-) I for one would prefer LoTW confirmations i/o E-Mail thank you letters from everybody I worked. Thanks for the contest QSO and its LoTW confirm
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-11/msg00210.html (9,401 bytes)

16. Re: [CQ-Contest] Sweepstakes: Should Ibepenalized forgettingmylicense in 20... (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 10:33:28 -0600
I'm certainly second with that. With my 73 check I was asked several times last weekend like this, OK TKS but what's your check???... And it was quite funny to see that this kind of check solicites
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-11/msg00360.html (8,453 bytes)

17. Re: [CQ-Contest] Dupes or Duped? (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Thu, 30 Nov 2006 18:02:10 -0600
For whatever reason sanity is not there yet in this respect. It's that easy to understand how and what... Let me remind you the situation you were in for sure. You call somebody during S&P especially
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-11/msg00877.html (10,683 bytes)

18. Re: [CQ-Contest] OE4A CQ WW DX 2006 Contest log (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2006 06:16:34 -0600
-- Maybe I am wrong. Maybe my voice will contradict others' wilingness to make pogs public, but... Let me paraphrase the above invitation. Yes, with an exaggioration, indeed. "Wanna see our log? Jus
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-12/msg00071.html (7,932 bytes)

19. Re: [CQ-Contest] OE4A CQ WW DX 2006 Contest log (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Dec 2006 16:37:43 -0600
CQWW PHONE is quite history while CQWW CW is still fresh. I just messed up the two contests. It's my mistake and I and returned back to OE1EMS with my appologies. 73, Vladimir VE3IAE -- ____________
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-12/msg00102.html (8,984 bytes)

20. [CQ-Contest] Abbreviations (score: 1)
Author: "Vladimir V. Sidorov" <vs_otw@rogers.com>
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 11:56:38 -0600
Please, don't go too far with the abbreviations! It's obvious that an exchange from CT3 will always be 33 regardless what you actually send, is it really 33 or VV or whatever. I'm affraid, some peopl
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2006-12/msg00136.html (7,250 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu