Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[RTTY\]\s+Telnet\/Packet\s+and\s+the\s+RTTY\s+RU\s*$/: 12 ]

Total 12 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [RTTY] Telnet/Packet and the RTTY RU (score: 1)
Author: "Scott Nichols" <snichols@mvosprey.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 13:57:29 -0400
This topic has been beaten to death on every ham reflector I belong too...However, it is a discussion that should continue, because I think NA contest sponsors are behind the proverbial 8 ball on thi
/archives//html/RTTY/2005-12/msg00094.html (12,495 bytes)

2. Re: [RTTY] Telnet/Packet and the RTTY RU (score: 1)
Author: "Shelby Summerville" <k4ww@arrl.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 16:22:05 -0500
Scott Nichols wrote: "IMO, forcing ASSISTED ops into the MULTI category only DIScourages participation and ENcourages cheating" Not sure I understand, how being "forced into a Multi category, discour
/archives//html/RTTY/2005-12/msg00095.html (9,837 bytes)

3. Re: [RTTY] Telnet/Packet and the RTTY RU (score: 1)
Author: "WW3S" <ww3s@zoominternet.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 18:36:26 -0500
So whats the difference between Muli-Single and SO2R? The number of operators? So why should a single op using packet be classified a multi-op vs a single-op assisted. I'm not saying lump them with a
/archives//html/RTTY/2005-12/msg00098.html (11,395 bytes)

4. Re: [RTTY] Telnet/Packet and the RTTY RU (score: 1)
Author: Andrei Nevis <v49a@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 15:56:28 -0800 (PST)
I agree, We can't put together Single Operators (even with two radios) and Multy Operators into one group, NO WAY. How can Single Operator compete with the Club Station? No way. If Single Operators u
/archives//html/RTTY/2005-12/msg00100.html (11,366 bytes)

5. Re: [RTTY] Telnet/Packet and the RTTY RU (score: 1)
Author: "Shelby Summerville" <k4ww@arrl.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 19:00:04 -0500
WW3S asked: "So whats the difference between Muli-Single and SO2R? The number of operators?" SO is not limited to 6 band changes, regardless of the number of transmitters being used! I'm convinced th
/archives//html/RTTY/2005-12/msg00101.html (9,270 bytes)

6. Re: [RTTY] Telnet/Packet and the RTTY RU (score: 1)
Author: Andrei Nevis <v49a@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 16:10:26 -0800 (PST)
This is 100 percent correct, Shelby. That's why it is neccessary to create SO Assisted Group for those, who uses Packet (I beleive 80-90% guys are using Packet/DX Cluster these days, anyway) The Sing
/archives//html/RTTY/2005-12/msg00102.html (9,420 bytes)

7. Re: [RTTY] Telnet/Packet and the RTTY RU (score: 1)
Author: "WW3S" <ww3s@zoominternet.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2005 19:27:55 -0500
Under the current rules, if you are a single op using packet, you ARE limited to the band change rule, correct? _______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com h
/archives//html/RTTY/2005-12/msg00103.html (6,998 bytes)

8. Re: [RTTY] Telnet/Packet and the RTTY RU (score: 1)
Author: "Frank Hunt" <zl2br@ihug.co.nz>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 23:04:03 +1300
Maybe there are too many Operator/Transmitter categories in some contests. Maybe there should just be two: Single (single operator and single transmitter) Multiple (multiple operators and/or transmit
/archives//html/RTTY/2005-12/msg00105.html (11,222 bytes)

9. Re: [RTTY] Telnet/Packet and the RTTY RU (score: 1)
Author: Richard Ferch <ve3iay@rac.ca>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 09:38:36 -0500
Under the present rules, regardless of whether you agree with them or not, there are only two categories: 1. Single operator - only one person, NO relief operators, NO helpers in the shack, NO helper
/archives//html/RTTY/2005-12/msg00107.html (9,012 bytes)

10. Re: [RTTY] Telnet/Packet and the RTTY RU (score: 1)
Author: Andrei Nevis <v49a@yahoo.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2005 08:14:40 -0800 (PST)
This is all correct, EXCEPT THIS: 3.2.2. Stations are allowed only one transmitted signal at any given time.. (This is only for Multy Stations.) Subparagraph 3.2.2 applies to this: 3.2. Multioperator
/archives//html/RTTY/2005-12/msg00108.html (10,302 bytes)

11. Re: [RTTY] Telnet/Packet and the RTTY RU (score: 1)
Author: Richard Ferch <ve3iay@rac.ca>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 13:07:27 -0500
Oh, don't get me wrong, Dennis. I think the rules for multi-ops in the Roundup are perfectly *fair*, that's not the issue. The point for me is that they result in a contest that can be *boring* for m
/archives//html/RTTY/2005-12/msg00137.html (15,628 bytes)

12. Re: [RTTY] Telnet/Packet and the RTTY RU (score: 1)
Author: <morris_karen@bellsouth.net>
Date: Fri, 16 Dec 2005 10:46:30 -0500
I can understand the comments concerning the band change rules for multi-singles. It does prevent the multi from "ping-ponging" on 2 or more bands. And I agree that an SO2R can beat the multi scores.
/archives//html/RTTY/2005-12/msg00145.html (11,571 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 12
Page: [1]
This search system is powered by Namazu