VHFcontesting
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [VHFcontesting] Contest Confusion

To: "VHF Contesting" <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [VHFcontesting] Contest Confusion
From: beamar <beamar@aol.com>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 09:38:30 -0400
List-post: <vhfcontesting@contesting.com">mailto:vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
I made no phone calls, sent or received no e mails and did not visit any chat 
rooms. But, I would be in favor of (almost) anything that would increase 
activity. Here in Florida there was little activity, for this contest. It was 
disgusting. My best DX was W4ZRZ in EM 63 - 472 miles or thereabouts - the only 
reason that we made that QSO was that we both just happened to have our 
antennas pointed at each other, when ZRZ called CQ. How many more great 
contacts, did I miss because of 10 degrees of antenna heading? 

Buddy WB4OMG 
EL 98

On Sep 16, 2013, at 8:37:24 AM, "Chuck Gress" <chuckgress@hotmail.com> wrote:

From:   "Chuck Gress" <chuckgress@hotmail.com>
Subject:        [VHFcontesting] Contest Confusion
Date:   September 16, 2013 8:37:24 AM EDT
To:     "VHF Contesting" <vhfcontesting@contesting.com>
Now that the September 2013 VHF Contest is in the history books, wouldn't it be 
nice to have the rules re-written on spotting nets, chat rooms, Ping Jockey 
etc. I have never seen a contest where a Multi-Multi Op station writes a 
message in a Chat Room saying that some of his QSOs were invalid because he 
used a Chat Room. Help us PLEASE!

K3NXH

_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting


_______________________________________________
VHFcontesting mailing list
VHFcontesting@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/vhfcontesting

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