Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Riley\'s\s+Replacement\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[Amps\]\s+Riley\'s\s+Replacement\s*$/: 8 ]

Total 8 documents matching your query.

1. Re: [Amps] Riley's Replacement (score: 1): Author: Kelly McNutt <mcnutt01@centurytel.net>; Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 18:08:48 -0600; Don't be so optimistic! I say at least give her a chance. K8MCN _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps; /archives//html/Amps/2009-01/msg00372.html (7,662 bytes)
2. Re: [Amps] Riley's Replacement (score: 1): Author: DAVE WHITE <mausoptik@btinternet.com>; Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 08:51:59 +0000 (GMT); Equal opportunities and diversity, remember? It's just the same there as it is here now: http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/798356/harriet-harman-unleashes-positive-discrimination.thtml Knowledg; /archives//html/Amps/2009-01/msg00374.html (8,941 bytes)
3. Re: [Amps] Riley's Replacement (score: 1): Author: Rick Stealey <rstealey@hotmail.com>; Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 13:46:36 +0000; Well, we COULD 1) rename the list "amps and the FCC." Or we could 2) restrict discussions to amplifiers. Or 2)discussions like this could take place somewhere such as QRZ.com, the "Talk Forum." Or w; /archives//html/Amps/2009-01/msg00375.html (7,592 bytes)
4. Re: [Amps] Riley's Replacement (score: 1): Author: DAVE WHITE <mausoptik@btinternet.com>; Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 14:52:42 +0000 (GMT); Just make up an FOC number and bogus reports, and give them to the contesters - ridicule them at their own elitist game. After all, what did Groucho Marx say about clubs? A few years ago, a friend o; /archives//html/Amps/2009-01/msg00376.html (8,980 bytes)
5. Re: [Amps] Riley's Replacement (score: 1): Author: Rob Atkinson <ranchorobbo@gmail.com>; Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 17:41:42 -0600; It is off-topic Bob and you will no doubt be told that on Tower Talk where I see you also introduced this thread. Since you asked, having a non-ham for the office of Special Counsel for Amateur Radio; /archives//html/Amps/2009-01/msg00377.html (8,401 bytes)
6. Re: [Amps] Riley's Replacement (score: 1): Author: "Ken" <kenw2dtc@comcast.net>; Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 19:54:33 -0500; K5UJ wrote: "for such a person comes to the job with no previous ham baggage, no biases, no preconceived notions of how ham radio "ought to be." That's refreshing and probably overdue." I'm not sure; /archives//html/Amps/2009-01/msg00378.html (6,935 bytes)
7. Re: [Amps] Riley's Replacement (score: 1): Author: George Fremin III <geoiii@kkn.net>; Date: Sat, 31 Jan 2009 16:58:28 -0800; Yes - this post is off topic. Please stop. The list runs quite well when I do not have to approve every message but I will if I have to. Thanks -- George Fremin III - K5TR geoiii@kkn.net http://www.k; /archives//html/Amps/2009-01/msg00379.html (7,163 bytes)
8. Re: [Amps] Riley's Replacement (score: 1): Author: "Carl" <km1h@jeremy.mv.com>; Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2010 15:17:24 -0400; K5TR has been the Amps moderator for about 2 years and KM3T owns contesting.com. You asked that question on here 4/5/09 Carl _______________________________________________ Amps mailing list Amps@con; /archives//html/Amps/2010-09/msg00354.html (7,460 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 8
Page: [1]