"It's only a matter of time before the only thing we need paper for is to
wipe..."
This is important stuff guys. It is important to remember that the ARRL
Board must figure out how to keep the boat afloat or the paper empowering
you to operate the next contest--your ham ticket--will be added to the list
of paper suitable for wiping!
I went to listen to Jim Hayne speak at the last local hamfest (Mpls-St
Paul). You take the individual costs of services provided and it adds up to
lots more than QST generates. Far too many people value the League's
effectiveness by the size, scope, and quality of QST, NCJ, QEX, etc. In the
grand scheme of things, these simple periodicals are almost irrelevant. Is
QST worth $3 a month? Not really. But that $3 a month pays for spectrum
defense, the ARRL lab, contest administration, QSL bureau, supporting loser
books that somebody has got to print (Microwaves, UHF/VHF books, etc.)
promoting ham radio, new ham training, the website, lots of administration,
etc.
If you want to contribute constructively, make some suggestions about how to
generate a few million bucks out of a bunch of ingrates that bitch for
months when they get rid of "senior" memberships or add $2/year to the cost
of their beloved QST. How many of your personal friends are NOT league
members? "QST is not worth it" they say as they clutch their beloved HT
(that's their entire hamshack they are so proud of) hanging from their belt.
Start shaming and guilting them into joining up or forever "shutting up,"
which is what they would be doing if the TELCOMs get their way. The FCC
would auction off each ham band, one at a time, and generate billions of $$$
of revenues.
The ARRL is the only game in town boys and girls. The ARRL is the only
thing standing between your beloved ham bands and Bill Gates.
Cutting a few pages from QST sounds like they are scratchin' the dirt for
funds. How about "entrance fees" for contests? Nobody likes taxes. Nobody
hates them more than me. But the reality is what the bank account dictates.
My $0.02
Ford-N0FP
ford@cmgate.com
PS I do not work for the ARRL. This is not a paid advertisement. This is
my opinion smakin' non-members in the nose!
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
>From K0HB H. Brakob" <HHBrakob@msn.com Wed Jan 9 21:15:10 2002
From: K0HB H. Brakob" <HHBrakob@msn.com (K0HB H. Brakob)
Subject: [CQ-Contest] Proposed QST changes
References: <3.0.5.32.20020109140920.017ed890@HIWAAY.NET>
Message-ID: <017e01c19952$baedd000$c82c1fcc@bigguy>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Aycock" <baycock@HIWAAY.NET>
> Mr. Butler,
> I have heard, (mostly on the internet) of certain changes in QST that are
> being considered. The specific changes will have the effect of down-playing
> the role of the Contesters, and the reporting of the pertinent activities,
> in QST. I am not a regular or dedicated contester, but, I MUST enter my
> protest at this further degradation of the role of QST in the activities of
> many Hams
A senior level headquarters person has emailed me with the following.
It provides a more palatable view of the issue which would have been
welcome as an initial way of introducing the issue to the folks down
here on the ground.
------
Contest results are already available to members via the Web prior to their
receipt of QST in the mail. From feedback we know that many of the members
who are interested in the contest results take advantage of this. We also
know from survey after survey that contest rules and results are the most
disliked content in QST; when we ask what members would like more of, and
what they would like less of, in QST the contest results and rules rank dead
last. Even so, encouraging operating skills and station performance is an
important part of the ARRL's mission. In short, while the contest community
is a significant constituency within the ARRL membership, the amount of QST
space committed to reporting of line scores and detailed rules is out of
proportion to the overall interests of the membership. At the same time, we
can provide much more in-depth coverage of contest results via the Internet
and the Web than we could possibly provide in QST. For example, we can
provide band-by-band contact and multiplier information for each entrant,
not just for the high scorers. We can let contesters download the data so
they can perform their own analysis. With some of the space freed up by
moving line scores to a more appropriate medium we plan to expand editorial
coverage of contest activities in a way that we hope will be more favorably
received by the members who are not themselves contest participants.
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|