开云体育

I've submitted scores to contests, too, and I can understand interest in where you placed. However, I think listing the top, say, 25, in each category would be enough. The complete listing could have been kept on line or, before the internet, perhaps you could send in a postcard and have it mailed back with your score/position.

I know you are a huge contest person and with the station setup you have and the people who work with you, you're used to being near the top of the heap, and that would be published. But CQ would sometimes devote 30 pages to nothing but calls and scores. I just think it was overkill and there may have been a better way to service those who are interested in the scores and the remaining readers who would rather read something else.

I talked many times with numerous other hams who feel the same way. I'm a little miffed by CQ and Rich Moseson because I wrote 6 issues with a column plus some articles for him and, despite promises and me trying to help him, he never paid me for any of them. Rich was aware of the contest results printing and was advised by me and others to find a way to placate both sides, but he wouldn't budge. He was told by many that he needed to get back to what CQ was at its outset, but it didn't happen and it finally collapsed.

Alas, the ARRL and QST seems to be moving away from those things that made it great towards a magazine that seems to be interested in selling ads. I would love to see more new building projects and less reprints of past articles that I can look up in the archives. I think contest results could have the Top X List printed and the rest available for review online. I think that would better-serve everyone.

Jack, W8TEE