Ron, et al:
Kelly Taylor wrote:
>I support the efforts to move line score coverage to the Web
>(where it can be MUCH more valuable to the people who actually
>care about them) and increase non-line score copy in QST, where
>it can be much more interesting to the people who don't care
>about line scores.
Ron Wetjen wrote:
>The idea of cutting line scores is to reduce the number of pages
>in QST (I've heard 16 pages will be cut) - not free them up for
>something else. Cutting line scores and section news reduces the
>number of pages in QST and makes publishing costs less ... it
>doesn't mean more content will take their place.
If, say, 16 pages were 'saved' by moving the line scores, this doesn't
necessarily imply that ALL of those pages would be lost.
Assuming that Kelly's statement, above, is correct, even if a FEW of those
16 pages were used to increase non-line score copy for contests, this would
be a good thing. And the ARRL would still be saving a BUNCH of paper in the
process.
I have no reason to doubt Kelly's statement, which implies that SOME of the
lost pages may actually be used in further SUPPORT of contesting, by way of
enhanced write-ups.
While I will miss not seeing my call... generally way down toward the
bottom of most listings... in QST, I certainly WOULD like to be able to
access the results more quickly via the Web, and to have them available to
all operators, not just ARRL members.
Tom Hammond N0SS
|