ZL2CA wrote:

I do not agree with your glossing over error-rate in articles:

Editorial errors give the publisher a bad image with knowledgeable

readers.

Getting it right the first time takes a lot of beating.

I agree entirely that 100% accuracy should always be the aim, and I believe
that RadCom and QST both have a high hit rate, but the point I  was making
was that a story with some errors in it will still do more good for the LF
fraternity than no story at all.

37

Moke, X3GDV