Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Sending\s+Call\s+getting\s+worse\?\s*$/: 15 ]

Total 15 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Sending Call getting worse? (score: 1)
Author: "Edward Sawyer" <SawyerEd@Earthlink.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 07:28:29 -0500
As usual, the frustration of stations not sending calls sets in during contests. Is it worse, personally, I don't think so. Its been bad for at least 5 years if not more. A few notables were VP2MMM,
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00268.html (8,953 bytes)

2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Sending Call getting worse? (score: 1)
Author: Jeffrey Embry <jeffrey.embry@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 08:40:44 -0500
That's odd Ed, For the limited amount of time I was on (roughly 15 hours) I noticed a marked improvement in stations IDing. Of the three listed below, I VP2MMM IDed about every 3 to 4 QSOs, or at lea
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00274.html (11,697 bytes)

3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Sending Call getting worse? (score: 1)
Author: Mats Strandberg <sm6lrr@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 19:50:14 +0400
I agree with those who are P-D off with bad IDing development. Getting worse for sure and time has come to make a rule revision to enforce better ID practices. The only thing that helps is unfortunat
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00280.html (14,403 bytes)

4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Sending Call getting worse? (score: 1)
Author: KU7Y <ku7y.cw@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 09:16:10 -0800
I think the simple cure is to require the call sign to be part of the exchange. That should also be easy to enforce. OK, back in my hole, Ron, KU7Y CWOps #1211 Northern California Contest Club Arizon
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00286.html (8,061 bytes)

5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Sending Call getting worse? (score: 1)
Author: "VE5ZX" <ve5zx@hotmail.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 14:16:42 -0600
I think the simple cure is to require the call sign to be part of the exchange. I second that motion! Syl - VE5ZX _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@co
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00296.html (8,048 bytes)

6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Sending Call getting worse? (score: 1)
Author: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 17:47:50 -0500 (EST)
The concept of sending your call works for at least two major contests...Sprint and SS. K4XS In a message dated 11/26/2013 7:06:42 P.M. Coordinated Universal Tim, ku7y.cw@gmail.com writes: I think th
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00306.html (8,203 bytes)

7. Re: [CQ-Contest] Sending Call getting worse? (score: 1)
Author: Joe <nss@mwt.net>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2013 22:18:15 -0600
I like the idea, BUT...... Does anyone get busted for not doing it? I worked many LOUD and fast running stations during SS a few weeks ago, and they did not send their call in the exchange all the ti
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00324.html (9,382 bytes)

8. Re: [CQ-Contest] Sending Call getting worse? (score: 1)
Author: "Rex Maner" <k7qq@netzero.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 09:56:19 -0500
( CALL ?? ) even if you know it. Rex k7qq I like the idea, BUT...... Does anyone get busted for not doing it? I worked many LOUD and fast running stations during SS a few weeks ago, and they did not
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00335.html (10,880 bytes)

9. Re: [CQ-Contest] Sending Call getting worse? (score: 1)
Author: Joe <nss@mwt.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 08:42:23 -0600
Yeah but what is that doing other than just slowing them down for a second or two? I know I am in a minority here on my opinion. but I am a stickler when it comes to the "RUlES" if there is a "RULE"
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00338.html (11,590 bytes)

10. Re: [CQ-Contest] Sending Call getting worse? (score: 1)
Author: "Radio K0HB" <kzerohb@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 11:59:04 -0500
Joe, I think you're taking this game a little too seriously. Screw up a QSO, you lose that QSO, but punishment in the form of additional score reduction is so 1940's. 73, de Hans, K0HB -- "Just a boy
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00344.html (9,155 bytes)

11. Re: [CQ-Contest] Sending Call getting worse? (score: 1)
Author: Cqtestk4xs@aol.com
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 16:38:54 -0500 (EST)
Without some sort of penalty why not guess and/or make up "uniques". Only the Qs that they don't like are the ones you lose. I don't know if the prior or subsequent QSO should be lost, but there need
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00356.html (9,054 bytes)

12. Re: [CQ-Contest] Sending Call getting worse? (score: 1)
Author: Joe <nss@mwt.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 16:35:31 -0600
And even us guys that have no chance of winning, but follow the rules.. does matter to us. Joe WB9SBD Sig The Original Rolling Ball Clock Idle Tyme Idle-Tyme.com http://www.idle-tyme.com On 11/27/201
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00359.html (10,439 bytes)

13. Re: [CQ-Contest] Sending Call getting worse? (score: 1)
Author: "Radio K0HB" <kzerohb@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 15:45:30 -0800 (PST)
If you guess, it's a busted Q = No points.  With crutches like Super-Check-Partial loose in the wild, who needs to guess anyhow? 73, de Hans, K0HB _______________________________________________ CQ-C
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00364.html (10,137 bytes)

14. Re: [CQ-Contest] Sending Call getting worse? (score: 1)
Author: Joe <nss@mwt.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Nov 2013 18:17:09 -0600
Thats exactly why I was saying about the penalty of before and after qso's. In the old days I think I remember it was called Callbooking. Where a missing mult was "Fabricated" or even more hidden wer
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00369.html (11,115 bytes)

15. Re: [CQ-Contest] Sending Call getting worse? (score: 1)
Author: "Radio K0HB" <kzerohb@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 28 Nov 2013 10:08:02 -0500
In the 1940's with paper logs, and no robot to cross-check them, I can see that could be a problem. 70 years later we now have computerized logs and extensive cross-comparison of logs by the robot. S
/archives//html/CQ-Contest/2013-11/msg00384.html (9,864 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu