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

Results:

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

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Stewing about QRP (score: 1): Author: mgilmer@gnlp.com (Gilmer, Mike); Date: Mon Dec 20 14:21:33 1999; I think it's silly to equate running QRP with somehow having or being forced to have a third-tier station. Don't know why this even entered into this discussion. It surely has nothing to do with Bill; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1999-12/msg00210.html (7,426 bytes)
2. [CQ-Contest] Stewing about QRP (score: 1): Author: btippett@alum.MIT.edu (Bill Tippett); Date: Tue Dec 21 03:45:09 1999; "In fact, it seems that the station working the QRPer should be given a bonus, too, not just the QRPer." Very true! I would argue that the station RECEIVING a QRP exchange on 160 deserves more points; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1999-12/msg00215.html (7,043 bytes)
3. [CQ-Contest] Stewing about QRP (score: 1): Author: kg5u@hal-pc.org (Dale L. Martin); Date: Tue Dec 21 17:42:37 1999; Balderdash! I KNOW you guys are joking here. Boy, I hope so. Otherwise, what you are saying is that LP and HP stations are NEVER weak. And a QRP station is ALWAYS weak. Right? Wrong. 73, dale, kg5u; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1999-12/msg00226.html (7,356 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]