Hi David,
Building on what I, and others have said about non-acknowledgement etc, here is a list of the submissions I have made about which I have queries:
DOL Starter repair
Sent Aug 07 by email; acknowledged Aug 07. Repeated Jul 10 by CD.
Parting off tool
Sent Mar 10 by email; no acknowledgement. Repeated Jul 10 by CD.
Wax Plate usage
Sent Jun 10 by email; no acknowledgement. Repeated Jul 10 by CD.
Filing Rest
Sent Jul 10 by CD; no acknowledgment.
In or around May-Jul 10, I received a copy of the Contributors Guidelines. As a result of this, I realised that none of the first three items met the guidlines, so I rejigged all three as necessary, and re-submitted along with the last item, all on CD in July 2010. I have had no acknowledgement of it’s receipt. This, may be that although there was a covering letter enclosed along with name, address and ‘phone number, I omitted to provide an email address, although, as I doubt very much that you will have another contributor with the eaxct same name, it would have been possible to find my email address from other communications.
I have also sent an article on using a cycle computer for speed measurement. This was in Nov 08, was acknowledged, but nothing else.
As someone else has said, not knowing if they are of use, or if not suitable and not knowing why, does not incentivise one to go to the trouble of photographing items in course of whatever and then writing it all up, especially when setting up for photography can take an inordinate length of time. I fully accept that, for example, the DOL Starter repair may well be a one-off, and that for people without the necessary skills it could even be classed as dangerous (but not when completed) and therefore not suitable, but I would like to know. Similarly, the cycle computer device may well be duplication, but again, if it is to be rejected for that reason, then again I would like to know.
I think it is important to realise that lack of acknowledgement plus lack of feedback (for articles) will cause people to stop bothering and you will then be in an even worse situation.
Regards,
Peter G. Shaw