Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Log\s+dupes\s+in\s+SS\s+$or\s+any\s+\'Test$\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Log\s+dupes\s+in\s+SS\s+$or\s+any\s+\'Test$\s*$/: 4 ]

Total 4 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Log dupes in SS (or any 'Test) (score: 1): Author: Art Boyars <artboyars@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 12:15:28 -0500; I finally figure out my SS CW LCR from 2014. I worked VA3xx, but fat-fingered his call to VXA3xx. So, when I heard him much later he did not show as a dupe, and I worked him again. My LCR shows "bust; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-11/msg00135.html (7,462 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Log dupes in SS (or any 'Test) (score: 1): Author: Tom Haavisto <kamham69@gmail.com>; Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2015 22:55:40 -0500; Thanks for bringing this up. There were several folks sending "QSO B4", and I am not sure what the purpose of it was. Clearly, EVERYONE is using computerized logging these days, and if one person dec; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-11/msg00161.html (9,196 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Log dupes in SS (or any 'Test) (score: 1): Author: "john@kk9a.com" <john@kk9a.com>; Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 14:26:41 -0500; Unless a station is very difficult to copy, I work them again. I do not have a "B4" macro and even in a contest with a long exchange like last weekend's SS it is still better to just to work them aga; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-11/msg00170.html (8,806 bytes)
4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Log dupes in SS (or any 'Test) (score: 1): Author: Gerry Hull <gerry@yccc.org>; Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2015 15:24:08 -0500; I agree about working dupes. However, in both N1MM and Wintest, when you work a station you have worked before, immediately in the log it shows you the QSO. If you want to, and have time, you can tel; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2015-11/msg00175.html (10,888 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 4
Page: [1]