On Dec 29, 2:50*pm, Greg Arnold wrote:

The editor of Soaring must be good at two things. *First, he must have
wide contacts in the soaring community, and be interested in all the
various topics that John describes above. *With that background, he can
approach people for the articles that make for an interesting magazine.

I agree completely. It was a big reason John Good made such a good
editor during his time at Soaring magazine. He'd call me up and say
"Here's an idea for an article people would like to read, and you are
exactly the person to write it". How could I say no to that? And he
was doing that to other people, too. It worked.

An editor for a soaring publication can't just wait for articles to
appear, because there won't be enough good ones. The editor and the
editorial board needs to find out members want to read, and also
figure out what they should read, then actively seek articles on these
subjects. Many of these articles can and should come from well known
soaring people (the "usual suspects"), but it's absolutely essential
to actively seek and encourage new writers.

Doing this isn't as easy as sorting through what's been sent
unsolicited, but it yields a much better magazine, meaning one the
members really look forward to, and one that better serves the sport.
The editor can't be the only one twisting arms, either, but needs a
number of people with different interests (contests, clubs, technical,
etc) working with him, soliciting articles.

From the potential writer's viewpoint, the assurance that the article
will very likely be published makes the effort to write a good article
seem worthwhile. Without some assurance, a lot of people aren't
willing to go to the substantial effort it takes to write the article
in the first place. This assurance is particularly valuable to new
writers.