VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [VHFcontesting] rover rules

To: "(Radio) VHF Contesting" <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] rover rules
From: "Mike (KA5CVH) Urich" <ka5cvh@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 18:26:14 -0600
List-post: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com">mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 18:15, Ev Tupis <w2ev@yahoo.com> wrote:

> I understand your point-of-view, Steve.  I tend to be a root-cause analyst 
> out of laziness.  If I can fix something once, I will.  Revisiting the same 
> issue cyclically makes me grumpy. :)


Mike contends

Then why not just do away with any rover to rover contacts at all.
After all this would eliminate any further problems that may arise
when people find ways to exploit these.  And yes I am trying to
punctuate the absurd by being absurd.

-- 
Mike Urich, KA5CVH
http://ka5cvh.com

If pro is opposite of con.
Then what is the opposite of progress?
_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>