NO CW? I shudder to think it!!

David Robbins k1ttt at
Wed Dec 4 22:13:34 EST 1996

MarchandJohn wrote:
> Here's a couple of suggestions: (grin)
> 1. Delegate the prez to be the sole operator of the 11 meter position.
> 2. I have a bucket of tar, who can get some feathers?..... I wonder how he
>     would look in a chicken suit?
> 3. Does he have an Internet address? Maybe he's starving for some E-Mail?
4. call them on ssb and ask for a cw contact.

5. call them using cw on their ssb freq, after all cw is permitted
everywhere and nothing forbids cross mode contacts.

6. volunteer to operate and 'accidently' break the microphone, and
just happen to have a straight key in your pocket.

David Robbins K1TTT (ex KY1H)
k1ttt at   or   robbins at

>From km9p at (Bill Fisher KM9P)  Wed Dec  4 22:16:10 1996
From: km9p at (Bill Fisher KM9P) (Bill Fisher KM9P)
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 17:16:10 -0500 (EST)
Subject: k5zd flap, 3830, cq-contest
Message-ID: <Pine.BSI.3.95.961204171013.5665A-100000 at>

Some have suggested that the post contest reporting such as done by K5ZD,
K3ZO, N2IC, etc should live only on 3830 at  I disagree.  I
think they should be cross posted to both lists.  They are very
informative and include information that isn't only relative to the
participants of the contest in question.

3830 at should be used for score reporting.  If you are only
sending your line score, rate sheet, etc then send it to 3830.  If you are
sending a lengthy description of your effort, and it would have interest
to the group at large, then send it to both.

As a rule cross posting is a not a good idea.  In this case I believe it
is OK.


Bill, KM9P (still) / K4AAA

>From nt5c at (John Warren)  Thu Dec  5 03:31:26 1996
From: nt5c at (John Warren) (John Warren)
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 1996 22:31:26 -0500
Subject: No CW????
Message-ID: <1362405366-537795 at BANJO.EASY.COM>


We have been over and over this issue ad nauseam. PLEASE calm down and
don't stir up the whole wretched mess again.

While the decision of that one Club President (if reported correctly) is
just plain stupid, it's hardly a reason to get out the knives again for
every No-Code Tech in the nation. There are experienced Extra Class hams
who have found No-Code Techs to be a wonderful source of desperately needed
new talent for the hobby. Instead of bashing them, why don't you try
"adopting" a few, and elmering them to bigger and better things? I always
thought that was the tradition of amateur radio?

John, NT5C.

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list