- 1. [CQ-Contest] Arbitrary rules - interpreted as discrimination (score: 1)
- Author: david.e.burger@au.pwcglobal.com (david.e.burger@au.pwcglobal.com)
- Date: Fri Sep 27 11:28:06 2002
- The Contest organisers making contest results a few weeks earlier to members is trivial and should never had the bandwidth. The peculiar thing I noted when I was batting in the smaller contests last
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2002-09/msg00232.html (8,255 bytes)
- 2. [CQ-Contest] Arbitrary rules - interpreted as discrimination (score: 1)
- Author: k4ww@arrl.net (Shelby Summerville)
- Date: Thu Sep 26 22:01:53 2002
- <david.e.burger@au.pwcglobal.com> wrote: "The peculiar thing I noted when I was batting in the smaller contests last year, was the ONLY QSOparty in the USA to restrict international ham participation
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2002-09/msg00235.html (7,230 bytes)
- 3. [CQ-Contest] Arbitrary rules - interpreted as discrimination (score: 1)
- Author: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com (Cqtestk4xs@aol.com)
- Date: Thu Sep 26 23:35:19 2002
- I think there is another contest that has an arbitrary rule that restricts participation. You can't win the 10-10 contest unless you are a member of the 10-10 group...paid up to date of course. You c
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2002-09/msg00238.html (7,132 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu