Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+FCC\s+Rules\s+on\s+Pecuniary\s+Interest\s+\[was\:Station\-SpecificIncentives\]\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+FCC\s+Rules\s+on\s+Pecuniary\s+Interest\s+\[was\:Station\-SpecificIncentives\]\s*$/: 2 ]

Total 2 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [CQ-Contest] FCC Rules on Pecuniary Interest [was:Station-SpecificIncentives] (score: 1): Author: "Buck - N4PGW" <n4pgw-list2@towncorp.net>; Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 16:39:15 -0400; Look again, there IS more to it. Don't interfere with other ongoing communications is one of the issues. 73 for now. Buck N4PGW _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-07/msg00762.html (11,260 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] FCC Rules on Pecuniary Interest [was:Station-SpecificIncentives] (score: 1): Author: Radiosporting Fan <radiosporting@yahoo.com>; Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2005 15:33:29 -0700 (PDT); This thread was about understanding the context within which the FCC interprets items of "pecuniary interest"...not intentional interference. That would be a different discussion. Kind regards, Ev, W; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-07/msg00765.html (10,204 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 2
Page: [1]