OK. - https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/hack 6 c : a clever tip or technique for doing or improving something Very similar to kink : https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/kink 3: a clever unusual way of doing something How is this inventing a definition since it's been defined by a dictionary, and not just any dictionary - but one with 190 years experience?
You are dense. TOO dense. Don't you have some other forum to present YOUR opinions? The PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE and Consensus is that Hack is a Negative and not a Positive. You focus on words and not meanings, huh? If a definition is questionable, it's questionable. Trying to twist and shape it to YOUR emotive feelings is not going to sway anyone with a normal, thinking brain. By the way, that Meriam-Webster link says this: 6 a : a usually creatively improvised solution to a computer hardware or programming problem or limitation Get it? IT'S A COMPUTER TERM. Not related to ham radio experimentation.
Yep. I got it alright. You just go ahead and tell those hacks at the ARRL they got it all wrong! And Websters too! Looks like Dictionary.com screwed up as well -"Informal. a tip, trick, or efficient method for doing or managing something: hacks for holiday entertaining; ". Yes, there are "negative" definitions. Is your claim that "Kink" is free of any negative connotations? Context is key, and hams are considers some of the original hackers. Google "ham radio hacks" - by your definition I should get a bunch of hams that couldn't cut it. Not sure I get this at all, why did you post your letter on QRZ when sending it to the ARRL would suffice? Are we not entitled to our opinions? I must be dense...
Si linguis non mutantur, nos loqui Latina. Aut aliquid senior. Hack may have had a negative connotation for some, at some time in the past. But at least since the 1980s, I've heard it used mostly with a positive connotation. Doesn't everybody read https://hackaday.com? Among other interesting things, they have quite a few ham radio articles, but their ham radio articles tend to be more about building unique radio gear, not buying and using appliances. In the comments on the articles, a frequent theme is some variation on, "that's not good enough to be called a hack".
BTW, October 2017 was the first issue with "Hints and Hacks", which included an explanation from the editor. You might want to read it as it addressed your original question as to why.
You ARE dense. I posted the letter with the impetus of why change something if if does not need changing and that it has negative connotations. Go ahead, prefer the negative (hack) and ignore the positive (kinks) and pretend that YOUR opinion trumps the consensus opinion. DENSE...
Reason? Because qrz.com did post it but the ARRL did not put it in their Correspondence column. At least qrz.com is honest enough for someone to have an opinion and not ignore it.
Ding-ding! I sent it to the ARRL and hat did I receive from them? Nothing — nothing at all. Again, why change something that was a long-time tradition for no useful purpose and when no one asked for it. I guess it was to romance a bunch of hacks.
I agree: I saw no reason to change the column name to Hints and Hacks, except that the current J-School grads who run QST are desperately trying to appeal to the 5 or 10 Millennial / computer nerds out there who have ham licenses and might think, "what's a kink?" But if it were up to me, QST would have kept the old Phil Gildersleeve column headings too. And it would have technical content that is now shoved off to QEX, for which you have to pay to read. It's all part of the slide by the ARRL into more dumbing down to appeal to consumer electronics plug and play hams, along with the proposal to let 300K Techs operate SSB on HF. For years, every 6 months or so, ARRL would put out a press release crowing about the over 700,000 hams but now suddenly there is a crisis because there aren't enough warm bodies to give out contest QSOs on HF, and by golly we need those shills to move product and give the plug and play hams something to do.
