The problem is that the "works" threshold is different for every person
and every situation. A lot of people seem to believe that what "works"
for one person and situation will "work" for them for their own
particular situation. Simply accepting that is much easier than
thinking, but then we've all been conditioned to be satisfied with
solutions to complex problems in the form of 30 second sound bites.

What I try to do is explain the relative merits of one approach or
another, in a quantitative way when possible, so those one or two people
out there willing to spend a few minutes of thought can decide for
themselves how to best trade things off -- whether one method or another
is more likely to "work" for them. I know this isn't a popular approach
in today's instant-gratification world -- thanks to those sound bites,
any response that isn't grossly oversimplistic has forever been dubbed
"waffling".

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Irv Finkleman wrote:

I agree Roy. I'm the stick it up in the air and if I work lots of stations
and hear things most of the other local stations can't then I'm a happy camper.

I'll settle for all the space between 'works' and 'doesn't work' -- much
less stress and lots more fun. I guess thats why they say 'Ignorance is
Bliss' or 'What they don't know won't hurt them'

73