Heck, my time wasn't valuable and reading it wasn't worth the effort.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Simmons, Reid W <reid.w.simmons@intel.com>
To: "tentec@contesting.com" <tentec@contesting.com>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Wednesday, February 03, 1999 1:10 PM
Subject: RE: [TenTec] Popular Communications slant and position
>
>David;
>
>When I used to receive it I considered "Pop Comm" to be a rather
>childish publication, rarely worthy of my valuable time to read it. I
>found their editorials to be lacking in substance, purpose, and facts.
>Perhaps the editor should consider a degree in Journalism from a
>reputable University, or at the very least, a high school diploma. It
>is a shame how one person, usually the editor, can single-handedly ruin
>a potentially useful publication. Editors should present truthful,
>unbiased facts and refrain from making judgments; that is the province
>of the reader.
>
>Reid, K7YX
>
>
>______________________________ Reply Separator
>_________________________________
>Subject: [TenTec] Popular Communications slant and position
>Author: "David E. Shelton" [SMTP:w4des@iolky.com] at MSXGATE
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
>Date: 2/3/99 9:14 AM
>
>
>In March 99 issue of Popular Communications on pp. 8,9 a letter to the
>editor from "Stuart Lent" stated that he was upset. His reason, because he
>couldn't hear the launch communications relay that a local ARC in Florida
>does as a service to the amateur community. Then following this he goes on
>to blast all amateurs that operate CW stated basically we cause nothing but
>interference and operate QRO only. According to the article there were
>stations 2 kHz above and below him at 14.295 MHz. This is all too common
for
>this magazine and its slant as anti-amateur radio and definitely anti-CW.
>
>Shortly after this letter another letter to the editor another appears on
p.
>10 that is written to the editor from Vern A. Weiss, W9STB. This is the one
>that really concerned me. This amateur is pro-CW and states his position
>from the beginning. Well that obviously upset the editor who replies that
CW
>is basically a waste of time and that it should be done away with ASAP.
>
>This is the kicker though, the anti-CW letter from "Stuart Lent" has no
>address listed, but the pro-CW letter from Vern A. Weiss, W9STB, has the
>full address given too which I am sure caused this fellow amateur a lot of
>harassing mail and very little support from this unlikely amateur community
>supporter.
>
>I would ask that if you are a SWLer or casually read Popular Communications
>magazine from the newstand as I do, or subscribe, please consider their
>obvious position and do as I will refuse to buy another copy.
>
>tnx es 73,
>David, W4DES
>w4des@arrl.net
>w4des@iolky.com
>Amateur Radio Transmitting Society
>of Louisville, KY (ARTS)
>http://www.aye.net/~w4cn/
>
>
>--
>FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
>Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
>Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
>Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
>Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
>
>--
>FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
>Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
>Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
>Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
>Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
>
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|