Don't feel bad, Kurt! I have had submissions rejected by ARRL for being
"too technical". These days, they just want pablum for publication.
If I were not a life member (thanks to my ex-wife many decades ago), I
would not pay annual dues. But, ..........having access to this RFI site
possibly makes it all worth it.
Dave - WØLEV
Dave - WØLEV
On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 9:57 PM KD7JYK DM09 <kd7jyk@earthlink.net> wrote:
> The following was posted to a longwave forum yesterday. I found it
> interesting:
>
> "When LED bulbs first came out, I did a lot of testing for different
> brands/models (now gone). All produced interference if close enough. I
> wrote an article for QST on the results. They rejected the article and
> said "Do not resubmit it or a similar article to QST or any of ARRL's
> publications" and stated they would not discuss why nor give a reason.
> Totally bizarre. I later met the president of the ARRL and he was
> dumbfounded when I told him about this. (I have been an editor and
> reviewer of an optics technical publication, rejecting more papers than
> accepting, but ARRL's behavior was extremely nonprofessional.) A
> letter in a shortly later issue of QST years ago mentioned the need for
> research on this and QST replied that something was planned but I never
> saw anything. (I always question why I stayed a member.)"
>
> Kurt
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
>
--
*Dave - WØLEV*
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
|