My point was that I’m in that “Give Back” part of my life to support this hobby, and I talk about it to inspire other to do the same.? But evidently that struck a sour chord with you.. so please ignore it.

?

I think that's unfair, Bill. The implication is that your Give Back activity struck a "sour chord" with me. Indirectly, it also implies that I'm not in the Give Back mode. That's not the case at all, and I even pointed out your efforts in support of the T41 Project. I think all of us at one time or another have engaged in Given Back activity. When I was in Omaha (1970-1974) and a stone's throw away from SAC headquarters, I ran phone patch traffic between our servicemen and women on Guam and the Marshall Islands for three hours every Tue and Thurs evenings for three hours and did that with few exception for the entire time I was there. The spouses really appreciated it. I did that until I left my teaching job there.?

?

I still give back in other ways, too. Other than the first year that I spoke at the FDIM (2018??) when they covered my room cost, I have not been paid for speaking at the conference, other than my registration fee was waived. Traveling to various clubs to speak on the T41 project is at my expense. The many Zoom presentations are also donated time. I don't have the talent in the hardware realm of projects, but I have answered hundreds of hams emails with various projects over the years, most on software issues. I've always tried to be available to hams with their projects. As to encouraging newcomers to our hobby, the 49-er article in QST points out that the reason for the article was because a young boy fell in love with our hobby after spending two hours at our GOTA station as part of Field Day. His mom said: "I'm sure it's a wonderful hobby, but where are you going to get the thousands of dollars for the radio?" Her son? was crestfallen. The 49-er article showed how one could have a working ham radio station for under $50. Indeed, if you look back at some of my early work on the T41 project, it was designed to give hams a good HF SDR station on a "lawn-mower budget". COVID and other supply chain problems increased the number of lawns to be mowed, but the intent was still there.-

?

I think most hams do what they can to foster interest in ham radio to others. I think saying that I view your efforts in that arena as a "sour chord" is totally without merit.

?

Jack, W8TEE

?

Like I said, you are a big contester and, while much more modest equipment, I enjoy contesting, too. I'm just not very good at it. I've participated in Field Day, the Sweepstakes, and several QRP contests every year for as long as I can remember. Indeed, the T41 Project evolved from a Field Day where I used a G90 and an EFHW at 15' just to see if 20W could compete. While I had no delusions about winning anything, I did learn that 20W is enough to enjoy a "high density" contest, even on SSB. My first contest was also when I was a Novice in 1954. As I recall, I finished 8th in the state of Ohio in the CW category. I, too, was proud of my accomplishment.

?

??????????????? "Never once took a dime for writing an article though, but that’s just me."

?

Not sure what the purpose of this dig was, but I assume it's because of my issue with Rich. I was surprised to learn that you were not paid for the QST and QEX articles, as the ARRL has always had a policy of paying for articles. I have been paid for some published articles, but that is standard for QST, Rad Com, and CQ. Al and I have also done presentations in person at various radio clubs around the state (OHKYIN Radio Club, Voice of America Club, DARA, Milford, and Franklin Radio Club) plus over a dozen live ZOOM presentations to audiences in the UK, India, and all over the US without charge. I've also written dozens articles for QRPp, Information Week, Bacon Bits Quarterly, K9YA Telegraph, C Programmer's Journal, InformIT, Dr. Dobbs Journal, plus seven articles for QRP Quarterly where I was paid nothing for the articles. I knew that the articles were free going in, but wrote the articles to support their efforts. The difference with CQ was that I had a contract to provide columns at a specified amount per column plus the two articles that were to be paid on a per-page basis. Despite Rich's promises, he chose to not pay me. The money isn't enough to make much difference one way or the other. It's the principle of honoring your word and not following through that upsets me.

?

I do some things to augment my retirement, but I also do a lot of things gratis. I had hoped that the T41 book would generate some income for Al and I and it has...just not as much as we had hoped. I figure we have made less than minimum wage for the hours we've put into the book, yet we still think it was a worthwhile effort. I know that we both have put in at least 60 hours/week since we started the Project back in 2018. Financially, it's been a bust, but when we look where we started and where the T41 is today, we're happy. Many other people, including yourself, have contributed freely to make the T41 Project what it is today. We have turned the Project over to you, Oliver, and the rest of the group with the hope that the T41 continues to improve in the future.

?

Jack, W8TEE

?

?

Like I said, you are a big contester and, while much more modest equipment, I enjoy contesting, too. I'm just not very good at it. I've participated in Field Day, the Sweepstakes, and several QRP contests every year for as long as I can remember. Indeed, the T41 Project evolved from a Field Day where I used a G90 and an EFHW at 15' just to see if 20W could compete. While I had no delusions about winning anything, I did learn that 20W is enough to enjoy a "high density" contest, even on SSB. My first contest was also when I was a Novice in 1954. As I recall, I finished 8th in the state of Ohio in the CW category. I, too, was proud of my accomplishment.

?

??????????????? "Never once took a dime for writing an article though, but that’s just me."

?

Not sure what the purpose of this dig was, but I assume it's because of my issue with Rich. I was surprised to learn that you were not paid for the QST and QEX articles, as the ARRL has always had a policy of paying for articles. I have been paid for some published articles, but that is standard for QST, Rad Com, and CQ. Al and I have also done presentations in person at various radio clubs around the state (OHKYIN Radio Club, Voice of America Club, DARA, Milford, and Franklin Radio Club) plus over a dozen live ZOOM presentations to audiences in the UK, India, and all over the US without charge. I've also written dozens articles for QRPp, Information Week, Bacon Bits Quarterly, K9YA Telegraph, C Programmer's Journal, InformIT, Dr. Dobbs Journal, plus seven articles for QRP Quarterly where I was paid nothing for the articles. I knew that the articles were free going in, but wrote the articles to support their efforts. The difference with CQ was that I had a contract to provide columns at a specified amount per column plus the two articles that were to be paid on a per-page basis. Despite Rich's promises, he chose to not pay me. The money isn't enough to make much difference one way or the other. It's the principle of honoring your word and not following through that upsets me.

?

I do some things to augment my retirement, but I also do a lot of things gratis. I had hoped that the T41 book would generate some income for Al and I and it has...just not as much as we had hoped. I figure we have made less than minimum wage for the hours we've put into the book, yet we still think it was a worthwhile effort. I know that we both have put in at least 60 hours/week since we started the Project back in 2018. Financially, it's been a bust, but when we look where we started and where the T41 is today, we're happy. Many other people, including yourself, have contributed freely to make the T41 Project what it is today. We have turned the Project over to you, Oliver, and the rest of the group with the hope that the T41 continues to improve in the future.

?

Jack, W8TEE

?

?

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

?

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

?

When it came to contest scores, I think CQ was the worst offender.? I found it hard to believe more than a handful of people would care about all of the scores in all of the contests.

?

Jack, W8TEE

?

?