- 1. Re: [CQ-Contest] High power reclassification (score: 1)
- Author: Drew Vonada-Smith <drew@whisperingwoods.org>
- Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 11:41:26 -0500
- Igor, If I can rephrase your argument, you are saying: 1) Congrats to RDXC that they want to catch cheaters. I agree. 2) That since no good method exists to do so, then an invalid method is O
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-10/msg00083.html (10,766 bytes)
- 2. Re: [CQ-Contest] High power reclassification (score: 1)
- Author: "Igor Sokolov" <ua9cdc@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2016 00:12:14 +0500
- Drew, 1)Yes it is my argument 2)No it is not my argument. Invalid method is not OK if it is invalid. Since I do not know the details of the method I am not in a position to make a judgment. 3) I do n
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-10/msg00093.html (12,986 bytes)
- 3. Re: [CQ-Contest] High power reclassification (score: 1)
- Author: Kelly Taylor <ve4xt@mymts.net>
- Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 19:36:43 -0500
- Hi Igor, Comments below. Good. Also good. Yes, but once a system has been devised that works, not by throwing people under buses without allowing them to defend themselves. 73, kelly, ve4xt _________
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2016-10/msg00109.html (14,610 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu