[CQ-Contest] ARRL report on line scores decision

Mark Beckwith swca at swbell.net
Wed Jul 24 05:45:14 EDT 2002

>It's too bad that contesters didn't support the NCJ in
>the past and it had to be saved by the ARRL.

Spilled milk.  Yes, it is too bad.

I would also have preferred the NCJ to have remained unaffiliated with the
ARRL (I published it in the 70s).  I was concerned we would lose a valuable
non-ARRL-centered forum.

But now, thanks to the efforts of the web-pioneers among us (Trey and Bill
come to mind, and we all know there are a bunch of others), we have got a
non-ARRL-centered forum now which is much more powerful than any print
periodical ever was or ever will be.

I don't think this "QST pages" thing is a big deal, and more power to the
ARRL for exercising responsible cost management.  Every time I read about
how the ARRL responded to an FCC proposal, which is frequent and
comprehensive, THAT is when I say "my ARRL dollars at work."

Any more, I could take or leave QST, but that is of relatively little
importance to me.  I trust the new marketing and development people to use
QST however they have to, to best ensure the future of ham radio.

"The future is the WEB, man."

Mark, N5OT

More information about the CQ-Contest mailing list