Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+NAQP\s+Multipliers\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+NAQP\s+Multipliers\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] NAQP Multipliers (score: 1): Author: David Pruett <k8cc@comcast.net>; Date: Fri, 03 Jun 2005 11:34:48 -0400; As one of the people who created the NAQP, I'd like to contibute a to this discussion concerning the rationale on multipliers in this contest. While I would not presume to speak for the current conte; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-06/msg00036.html (9,530 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP Multipliers (score: 1): Author: "W2RU - Bud Hippisley" <W2RU@frontiernet.net>; Date: Fri, 3 Jun 2005 18:26:58 -0000; was "states". Why were States the "obvious" multiplier when the long-stated intent was to replace a very popular contest that used ARRL Sections as multipliers? Why is that germane to a discussion of; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-06/msg00040.html (11,141 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] NAQP Multipliers (score: 1): Author: George Fremin III <geoiii@kkn.net>; Date: Sat, 4 Jun 2005 07:52:30 -0700; I will make a guess. - The NAQP is not an ARRL contest so using ARRL sections seems slightly out of place. - An effort to make the exchange as simple and as user (or maybe newbie) friendly as possibl; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2005-06/msg00043.html (9,901 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]