[Amps] QST

[Bob Maser]

So Hal, what you're saying is that any ham with half a brain should not look 
in QST for articles of substance.  I've found that to be the case for the 
last few years.  Why do we even subscribe to QST?  Maybe it's because of all 
the equipment manufacturers that need a place to hawk their stuff.  What a 
hobby!

Bob W6TR
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Harold Mandel" <ka1xo at juno.com>
To: "'Bill Fuqua'" <wlfuqu00 at uky.edu>; <amps at contesting.com>
Sent: Monday, December 18, 2006 12:30 PM
Subject: Re: [Amps] QST


> [snip]
>     I am becoming more and more disgusted with the lack of technical
> knowledge QST authors.
> [snip]
>
> Dear Bill, (et al),
>
> QST authors are politically correct. They do not insult or cause
> consternation
> for any member or advertiser.
>
> The articles need to be "sugar and spice."
>
> We don't want anybody becoming frustrated trying to find obscure parts.
>
> We would prefer the readers to deal with 9-volt battery projects and
> not get involved with HV, because that could be a lawsuit if somebody
> gets injured or killed from their project.
>
> We want the articles to be like television dramas, where everything
> gets a fifty-eight minute solution for the weekend warrior.
>
> The editors are where the technical rubber meets the road. Do you
> think it would be necessary for QST to submit technical articles to
> people who are well-versed enough to guage the correctness of an
> article?
>
> Years ago, when QST was in the small format and mostly B&W,
> technical articles had authors who spoke of the fine points of getting
> things to work, especially the WWII mil-surplus gear, and the
> Hints and Kinks department was often the best reading.
>
> Bill, people like you and me are just not welcome to submit stuff
> to QST. It's like someone with a good idea for a book spending months
> putting it together and then finding out that they need an agent to get
> published, and agents only deal with published authors.
>
> In college, a decent technical article could find a home. The IEEE
> would publish well-written stuff from unknown authors, simply on its
> technical merit.
>
> CQ, 73, JRSGB were some places for people to submit real meat, but I
> guess they've gone away, too.
>
> Bill, it's like television. We can turn the channel (remember when 
> channels
> WERE turned?), or we can simply switch the set off if we don't like the
> programming.
>
> That's why the reflector nets "serve the public interest."
>
> Respectfully,
>
> Hal Mandel
> W4HBM
>
>
> [snip]
>     I am becoming more and more disgusted with the lack of technical
> knowledge QST authors.
> [snip]
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Amps mailing list
> Amps at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/amps