Hi Nigel, whilst I agree with your sentiments it has to seen that those of
us (you me and John at least :-)) ) who do know which end of a soldering
iron gets hot are now in a minority amongst Radio Amateurs. It is
interesting and slighly galling to go back and read the congratulatory
letters when the "new design" was introduced. The demand for more articles
like those describing tropical DXpeditions......well these may have been
"selected" but they were genuine. Radcom is not the only "Journal" to suffer
the attack of the "designers" Electronics World has had the same tacky
"make-over" .....graph plots reduced to be too small to be usefully read yet
acres of white space to bow to the magic "design" ratio of "text to white
space" The latter has not had above one "proper electronics" article in the
last two years, most being barely disguised advertising or PR handouts. The
pure objective of conveying knowledge is it seems not sufficient. Printing
half the text on top of a saturated colour picture or "design" is another
abomination for readers like me with slowly failing eyesight. A sad end to
the Highly Acclaimed Wireless World, an ancestor of RadCom in the
1920s.....never mind the content half close you eyes and look at the
"picture" !!
You will note my web site is in "Times Roman", black on white and no video
clip/sound gimmicks....boring maybe, but it loads quickly and read the
content !! It is not intended to be mindless entertainment.
Moan over, best wishes both
Alan G3NYK
www.alan.melia.btinternet.co.uk
----- Original Message -----
From: <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2008 9:38 PM
Subject: Re: LF: satellites
>
> In a message dated 16/07/2008 21:07:05 GMT Daylight Time, [email protected]
> writes:
>
> I've not got an axe to grind re RadCom, but is the lack of major
> construction projects in RadCom more to do with there being less people
doing the larger
> scale design/construction projects as well as being motivated to write
it
> up for RadCom?
>
>
> ----------------------
>
> The use of internet groups to encourage cooperative design, both hardware
> and software, has led to a real time project structure that doesn't
necessarily
> lend itself to the monthly magazine publishing schedule.
>
> This of course does not only affect RadCom but, unfortunately, RadCom as
a
> serious technical publication started to lose credibility when a recent
past
> editor attempted to turn it into something more akin to Women's Weekly,
with
> his requesting accounts of radio amateur romances on one occasion, whilst
> dwelling more on his own interviews with radio "personalities" than
matters
> radio, which it would seem he didn't really understand.
>
> Whilst I don't suppose many tears were shed at his departure it doesn't
seem
> to me the RSGB has done the reputation of RadCom any more favours by
> employing Elaine Richards in a similar position.
> Especially when one considers that not very long ago she was suggesting
> through the pages of her radio comic that reports on any form of radio
activity,
> legal or otherwise, would be welcomed.
>
> If RadCom is taken to be the "shop window" for the RSGB in general, then
> perhaps it's time to ask what it is they think they're offering us for
our money.
>
> For RadCom to be seriously considered as a technical publication again it
> will be necessary to leave editorial control with those who have real
technical
> ability and not just scrape the barrel for anyone with prior magazine
> experience.
>
> regards
>
> Nigel
> GM8PZR
>
>
>
>
>
|
