I agree with this but I’m interested to hear the rationale and how much cost savings this produced, ergo is it worth it to reduce the quality to our members. Ria N2RJ On Fri, Feb 12, 2021 at 12:00 PM Richard Norton via arrl-odv < arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org> wrote:
This week I had a phone call from a member/volunteer not pleased that the paper that QST is printed on appears to now be of considerably lower quality than was used in the past. My March QST looks somewhat like the paper was once soaked in water, and later dried out.
The quality of the paper used in NCJ, QEX, and even OTA, is of much higher quality. CQ Magazine also continues to be produced on quality paper.
Why?
Approximately 11 pages of the March 2021 issue are reprints/summaries of articles and advertisements from past QST's. All members have access to these issues, not only those such as myself who retain our paper copies.
It is the paid staff's responsibility to acquire and/or produce appropriate material for our flagship publication. Only waiting for articles to come in over the transom might not be working.
Both in terms of physical product and content, today's QST product is not up to the standards which I feel appropriate for us to be providing to our membership. I hope this can be improved.
73,
Dick, N6AA
_______________________________________________ arrl-odv mailing list arrl-odv@reflector.arrl.org https://reflector.arrl.org/mailman/listinfo/arrl-odv