[PPRAANet] [GMCC] CO QSO Party question

[Phil Krichbaum]

    I suggested they eliminate the name as part of the exchange as that 
threw people for a loop as it is not expected as part of a state QSO 
party exchange and caused lots of explanations to the casual operators 
last year. It is also nice to advise the logging program people as far 
in advance as possible of any changes. Hopefully the event will still 
happen and can continue in the future with out any major changes in the 
format.
     I'm not sure why we have digital and VHF as it certainly doesn't 
seem to attract much attention even though I do operate both but didn't 
attempt to for last year's running of the event!
    73 Phil N0KE

Jim Reisert AD1C wrote:
> It's also getting late if loggers like WriteLog etc. have to be changed 
> to support the new list.
>
> 73 - Jim AD1C
>
> On 8/8/2010 2:08 PM, DickT-W0RAA wrote:
>   
>> Can somebody on the COQP Committee please answer this query?
>>
>> I would think that if a question comes in that somebody would answer it.
>>
>> Letting it go unanswered is a sure way to kill interest in the COQP.
>>
>> Dick
>> W0RAA
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Steve London"<n2icarrl at gmail.com>
>> To: "'GMC'"<gmc at mailman.qth.net>
>> Sent: Sunday, August 08, 2010 1:34 PM
>> Subject: [GMCC] [Fwd: [N1MM] CO QSO Party]
>>
>>
>>     
>>> Anyone have more info ?
>>>
>>> 73,
>>> Steve, N2IC
>>>
>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>> Subject: [N1MM] CO QSO Party
>>> Date: Sun, 08 Aug 2010 14:46:47 -0400
>>> From: John, K3CT<k3ct at verizon.net>
>>> Reply-To: N1MMLogger at yahoogroups.com
>>> To:<N1MMLogger at yahoogroups.com>
>>>
>>>
>>> The CO QSO party changed the VE multiplier list. Does anyone know if
>>> anything else changed?
>>>
>>> Email to coqpinfo at ppraa.org has not been answered and last year's rules
>>> have been removed.
>>>
>>> Please encourage your state coordinators to include this information for
>>> the developers and users.
>>>
>>> John, K3CT
>>>       
>
>
>