I only have the following QST's handy-the percentages are
contest/content (75 pages)
July 2001 (12%)1609 logs submitted for SS Phone
August 2001 (13%)
September 2001 (15%)
October 2001 (15%) 2418 logs submitted for ARRL CW
November 2001 (19%) 4803 logs submitted for ARRL DX Phone
December 2001 (5%)-not including Field Day, which is not, has never
been, a contest!
January 2002 (9%)
February 2002 (4%)
The average is 11.5% of contest related pages.
By the way, contests are reported under the by-line of "Operating". How
is Operating by members no longer important enough to put into print.
Isn't Section News reporting about what we do? That's not important.
Maybe we need to take a hard look at what QST should be about. Should
color pictures of stuff 80% of the hams never bother to read take
precedent over operating news?
How do you define a contester? Is it someone who gets on and works other
stations in a contest? To give a more restrictive definition surly
becomes too subjective (works 5 contests a year and makes 5,000 QSO,
etc).
Trying to define a contester is like tying to define a swimmer.
If you can swim (instead of just sinking), then you are a swimmer. If
you win a Gold Medal in a competition, you are still a swimmer.
In the 2001 ARRL DX phone Contest K9PG at ZF2NT made 3597 USA
contacts just on 10 meters. All of those USA contacts were with
people operating as "contesters."
Lastly, DX now gets 2 pages out 75 each month, 3%.
What is proposed by "staff" is about the same for contesting,
and moving section news totally out of print.
Some balance.
This is from the ARRL WEB page-
"Simply put, QST is the best source of news and practical
information from the world of Amateur Radio. All hams, regardless of
license class or experience, will find it indispensable."
Somehow the news concept is getting diluted.
73, Al
--
CQ-Contest on WWW: http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests: cq-contest-REQUEST@contesting.com
|