Amps
[Top] [All Lists]

[AMPS] Conjugate Matching and Efficiency

To: <amps@contesting.com>
Subject: [AMPS] Conjugate Matching and Efficiency
From: 2@vc.net (2)
Date: Wed, 30 May 2001 14:15:54 -0700
Will Angenent:

Can I reply to the post below without getting expelled from AMPS ?

tnx
-----------------------
>> Rich says;
>> 
>> >Are you familiar with the term "shaking-hands money"?
>> 
>> No. never heard it before.
>> 
>> >think they control the League by voting for ARRL Directors
>> 
>> A bigger laugh is to think the directors of any national society of more
>> than a handful of members (30? 50? 100 max) control it. Been there myself,
>> done that...........
>
>This stuff will go on forever!
>
>In truth, copies of Rich's articles were sent to over a dozen people 
>NOT involved in any way with manufacturing or QST advertising. 
>
>The ARRL was very surprised when there were no favorable 
>responses from these people. As a matter of fact, the staff at QST 
>went out of its way to find someone they trusted who agreed with 
>Rich, and drew a total blank.
>
>This put the league in a serious bind, because all of the Handbook 
>information that was about to be used was found to be technically 
>flawed.  
>
>At that point QST's staff decided they were in trouble, and upon 
>checking found out none of Rich's work was ever reviewed. Rich, 
>like many authors, had a "green light" that caused QST to publish 
>almost anything he submitted.
>
>QST's staff could do nothing but admit letters they had ignored for 
>many years were correct. (One letter was from Eimac, who 
>immediately after the first article attempted to correct 
>misinformation. That letter was "filed" at HQ for years without any 
>response.)  
>
>Rather than admitting a mistake they published the letters and let 
>the letters do the "dirty work". I did not and do not think that was a 
>good way to handle the problem. It keeps the real problem, a lack 
>of technical editing, from being apparent and shifts the blame to 
>outsiders. 
>
>The only reason excerpts from my letters appear so frequently is I 
>happened to catch the largest number of technical errors that 
>agreed with the independent reviewers. Because of that, I was 
>quoted in multiple places. 
>
>While some (but not a majority) of the letters used did come from 
>people connected with manufacturing, the truth is the actual review 
>process that turned Rich's green light off was accomplished with 
>people who were NOT advertisers or involved in commercial 
>aspects of amateur radio.
>73, Tom W8JI
>W8JI@contesting.com 
>
>--
>FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps
>Submissions:              amps@contesting.com
>Administrative requests:  amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
>Problems:                 owner-amps@contesting.com
>
>


-  R. L. Measures, 805.386.3734, www.vcnet.com/measures.  
end


--
FAQ on WWW:               http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/amps
Submissions:              amps@contesting.com
Administrative requests:  amps-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems:                 owner-amps@contesting.com


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>