[Lowfer] QST Article

[JD]

On Mon, November 13, 2017 3:37 pm, John Andrews wrote:
> ...and these efforts will not be helped by an article in a
> national publication with misleading information about interference.

Ouch!  Looks to me as if the QST blurb is an edited-down version of the
earlier ARRL Letter article, in which simply omitting all details of the
interference complaint (after nonetheless having mentioned it) thereby
left a totally erroneous impression.

(If I were feeling less charitable, I might make a snide remark about what
can you expect from a publication that continues to tacitly promote the
fallacy that loop antennas work by receiving "only" or "primarily" or
"mainly" the magnetic component of an EM wave...but fortunately I'm above
that.)

FWIW, in The LOWDOWN for November, we at least got the story right by
simply not mentioning XSH or the security camera in the first place. Too
bad there's such a huge difference in the circulation numbers.

JD