I get all three ARRL publications and usually NCJ is the most anticipated one
at my QTH.
I do miss when everything was in QST and maybe it might be worth considering
quarterly mega issues or supplements, like some of the financial magazines do.
These might also increase advertising revenue along with providing a wider
readership to more specialized areas.
Of course, print is in a decline and eventually everything will be electronic
publications. The new look of the ARRL Contest Newsletter is probably where we
are headed.
My feeling is that Sean, Ward and Al are all trying to improve, within the
limitations imposed, the contesting visibility within the ARRL publications.
Mistakes and items beyond their control will happen, my experience with them
has been nothing but positive.
Change is the only constant ;o)
73,
Julius
Julius Fazekas
N2WN
Tennessee Contest Group
TnQP http://www.tnqp.org/
Elecraft K2/100 #3311
Elecraft K2/100 #4455
Elecraft K3/100 #366
--- On Thu, 7/31/08, Richard DiDonna NN3W <nn3w@cox.net> wrote:
> From: Richard DiDonna NN3W <nn3w@cox.net>
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] 2008 ARRL DX Phone Results and opting out
> To: "Kutzko, Sean, KX9X" <kx9x@arrl.org>, cq-contest@contesting.com
> Date: Thursday, July 31, 2008, 10:55 PM
> I'm starting to wonder if perhaps the ARRL should begin
> publishing the
> abbreviated writeups in QST and the full writeups AND
> SCORES in NCJ. In
> addition, perhaps the ARRL should consider allow the
> membership to OPT for
> either QST or NCJ. Given that ARRL is quite general
> interest, many
> contesters might be content with foregoing QST and
> accepting NCJ as the
> subscription component of their annual League dues.
>
> Obviously, there is a revenue reduction to the League for
> those who are
> League members and pay the additional $15.00 for NCJ, but
> if NCJ was an
> option in lieu of QST, there is a savings in printing costs
> as I am sure QST
> costs a lot more to print than NCJ...
>
> Thoughts?
>
> 73 Rich NN3W
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kutzko, Sean, KX9X" <kx9x@arrl.org>
> To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
> Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2008 8:41 PM
> Subject: [CQ-Contest] 2008 ARRL DX Phone Results
>
>
> > Folks,
> >
> > Complete results for the DX Multi-Op and DX
> Single-Band categories were
> > not
> > printed in the QST version of the 2008 ARRL DX Phone
> writeup because all
> > of
> > the tables (Top Ten, Regional, Club Competition,
> Plaques, etc) were
> > mistakenly left out. The error was due to a
> misunderstanding about who
> > was
> > going to add the tables to the article. By the time
> the error was
> > discovered - one day before sending QST to the printer
> - a full page of
> > coverage had been reallocated to other articles and it
> was not possible to
> > recover it.
> >
> > The tables are a required part of the article, so the
> unpleasant decision
> > had to be made about what to text cut. The writeup
> author (N0AX) made the
> > decision to remove the full block of text instead of
> significantly
> > rewriting
> > the entire article so as to reduce its volume by
> nearly 25%. It was felt
> > that using the full text wherever possible was better
> than having limited
> > text that differed between the two versions of the
> writeup; print and
> > online. Obviously, some of the stations whose efforts
> were not reported
> > in
> > QST don't have the same perspective and it's
> easy to understand why they
> > might not see things in the same way, absent any
> information about how
> > this
> > all came to pass.
> >
> > Fortunately, unlike the old days, 100% of the full
> article, including the
> > DX
> > results removed from the QST version, is available in
> the Web article.
> > That
> > version should be available within the next couple of
> days. The online
> > version of all contest results should, in general, be
> available
> > simultaneously with the QST version, but the annual
> Board of Directors
> > meeting and internal work on the ARRL Web site delayed
> the conversion to
> > HTML of this particular article.
> >
> > Omitting such a significant portion of the writeup is
> not a permanent
> > policy
> > for DX Contest coverage. We appreciate that some
> might feel slighted by
> > the
> > omission and very much regret that the process of
> delivering a complete,
> > high-quality writeup went awry in this way. There
> will be steps taken to
> > avoid similar mistakes in the future since we all have
> the same goal - to
> > conduct the contest and report the results with high
> standards and
> > quality.
> >
> > 73,
> >
> > Sean Kutko KX9X - ARRL Contest Branch Manager
> > Ward Silver N0AX - ARRL DX Phone Results, Lead Author
> >
> > 73,
> >
> > Sean Kutzko KX9X
> > Contest Branch Manager
> > ARRL - The national association for Amateur Radio
> > 225 Main Street
> > Newington, CT 06111 USA
> > (860) 594-0232
> > email: kx9x@arrl.org
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > CQ-Contest mailing list
> > CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> >
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|