Return-Path: Received: (qmail 11587 invoked from network); 20 Feb 2001 12:19:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO murphys-inbound.servers.plus.net) (212.159.14.225) by excalibur.plus.net with SMTP; 20 Feb 2001 12:19:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 29520 invoked from network); 20 Feb 2001 12:19:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO post.thorcom.com) (212.172.148.70) by murphys with SMTP; 20 Feb 2001 12:19:37 -0000 X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Received: from majordom by post.thorcom.com with local (Exim 3.16 #2) id 14VBQI-0004zz-00 for rsgb_lf_group-outgoing@blacksheep.org; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 11:57:38 +0000 Received: from imo-d05.mx.aol.com ([205.188.157.37]) by post.thorcom.com with esmtp (Exim 3.16 #2) id 14VBQE-0004zt-00 for rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 11:57:35 +0000 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1106 Received: from G0MRF@aol.com by imo-d05.mx.aol.com (mail_out_v29.5.) id l.46.10d9991d (4255) for ; Tue, 20 Feb 2001 06:56:45 -0500 (EST) From: G0MRF@aol.com Message-ID: <46.10d9991d.27c3b57c@aol.com> Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2001 06:56:44 EST Subject: Re: LF: valid QSO or not ? To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Mailer: AOL 5.0 for Windows sub 105 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: rsgb_lf_group@blacksheep.org X-Listname: rsgb_lf_group Sender: In a message dated 2/20/01 9:52:38 AM GMT Standard Time, rik.strobbe@fys.kuleuven.ac.be writes: << Maybe now the moment has come that the committee of the 'Peter Bobek Award' takes a clear desicion under what circumstances a QSO on 136kHz is valid (for the award). >> Hi All, but in particular Laurie and Larry. Well done to both on the transatlantic QSO Marathon. Can to clarify if you are both claiming the Peter Bobek award from the sponsoring organisations with this QSO? Thanks David G0MRF