Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Re\:\s+ARRL\s+proposal\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[TenTec\]\s+Re\:\s+ARRL\s+proposal\s*$/: 3 ]

Total 3 documents matching your query.

1. [TenTec] Re: ARRL proposal (score: 1): Author: nwald@interaccess.com (Norman Wald); Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 11:34:51 -0500; I know that the TenTec reflector is not the place for the ongoing discussion regarding licensing changes, but as a person who owes his livelihood to what I learned to get my ham license, and from my; /archives//html/TenTec/1998-07/msg00240.html (9,733 bytes)
2. [TenTec] Re: ARRL proposal (score: 1): Author: casey.bahr@intel.com (Bahr, Casey); Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 10:05:47 -0700; Thought I'd take this off-line wrt the reflector, but why should I be first to pull the plug. I'll promise that this is my last post on this subject here, though. [>] Phone ops will gain bandspace,; /archives//html/TenTec/1998-07/msg00241.html (14,049 bytes)
3. [TenTec] Re: ARRL proposal (score: 1): Author: JDuffy@aol.com (JDuffy@aol.com); Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 16:12:33 EDT; Hello again, Nothing like a discussion on CW to start a war. I agree that the Ten-Tec reflector is not the place for this discussion, so this is the last post. To those of you that sent mature respon; /archives//html/TenTec/1998-07/msg00249.html (7,405 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 3
Page: [1]