- 1. NA QSO Party (score: 1)
- Author: n9ljx@ecn.purdue.edu (Scott A Stembaugh)
- Date: Thu Jul 22 04:32:57 1993
- Having just recently gooten bit by the contesting bug I am hoping to gleen some education from those with more experiance than myself. I am going to do the NA QSO Party and was wondering about some o
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1993-07/msg00180.html (6,694 bytes)
- 2. NA QSO Party (score: 1)
- Author: levin@BBN.COM (Joel B Levin)
- Date: Mon Jul 26 11:12:30 1993
- And he's not likely to. I asked Ken about this at Manchester (where I bought a copy) and he says that contest is <someone else's> territory and he's not going to encroach. (Paraphrased, and I forgot
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1993-07/msg00209.html (6,508 bytes)
- 3. NA QSO Party (score: 1)
- Author: ericr@access.digex.net (Eric Rosenberg)
- Date: Mon Jul 26 15:30:25 1993
- N6TR's program does. For less intese, part-timers likeme, it is FAR easier to use than CT or NA.
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1993-07/msg00213.html (6,481 bytes)
- 4. NA QSO Party (score: 1)
- Author: mraz@maverick.aud.alcatel.com (Kris Mraz)
- Date: Mon Aug 3 09:59:45 1992
- Had lots o'fun in the NA QSO Party. But was off the air for a large part due to local severe weather. As expected, lots of 6-land participation. Very little Canadian activity and nil other NA countri
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1992-08/msg00001.html (7,514 bytes)
- 5. NA QSO Party (score: 1)
- Author: reisert@mast.enet.dec.com (Jim -- MLO3-6/B9 -- DTN 223-5747 03-Aug-1992 1042)
- Date: Mon Aug 3 11:37:52 1992
- --Reply to mail dated 3-AUG-1992 10:08:32.73-- In the strictest sense, a QSO must have the following information exchanged by both parties: Your callsign The other station's callsign The report In th
- /archives//html/CQ-Contest/1992-08/msg00003.html (7,317 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu