there is a very fine balance between asking for, and sometimes demanding 
accessibility, and going beyond that and becoming a pain.
Sometimes you have to become a pain in the butt to get things done. 
However, the balance is in being a tactful pain in the butt, and knowing 
what your talking about and not backing down.  If you are not tactful, then 
quite often those who are in a position to make change, push back and refuse 
because their pride or ego's have been offended.

Unfortunately, many folks in advocacy rolls feel they can't push too much 
because they feel bad about offending people or asking for what they think 
of as too much.
I always say, ask for the moon, and you should be able to meet half way.
It's like negociating.  Both sides want something, and if a common consensus 
can be found that makes both parties happy, then that's good.
But that consensus can't be reached if one side is demanding something 
impossible or unfeesible.  Asking for an accessible version of qst 
regardless of the source, to be availible in a timely manner so that we as 
blind consumers may share in the information provided is not asking too 
much.  But one must be diplomatic and tactful in the way one goes about 
indicating such.
I suspect the delay of QST on BARD is due to the fact that either 
volunteers, or part time people are submitting the magazine in electronic 
format to the site.
Demanding shorter turn around time may be an impossibility given the 
resources of the organization.
So, one must find another source, and what better source than the original, 
the ARRL.
Have the magazine produced in an accessible format right from the get go. 
Cheaper for all organizations and technically possible.
The source material that goes into the magazine is all electronic to begin 
with, more than likely all in formats accessible to screen readers, other 
than the graphical material IE pictures, diagrams and so on.
This same thing has been done with college and university textbook 
publishers.  The source material is all in either PDF or word document 
format at the editing stage.  The trick is to convince the publisher to 
release that material to colleges and universities for their blind students.
most are quite willing.
So the key here is to contact the editor of QST to find out what format the 
source material is in before it is actually published both electronically 
and tradditionally.
A balance may be able to be struck at this point rather than using a sledge 
hammer to put in a finishing nail.
legal action, NFB advocacy, management and using round about methods will 
take up time and resources.

Does anyone know the editor or have access to the editor?  I think someone 
mentioned they did.
A key thing would be for everyone who cares, to send a properly written 
factual letter IE email, to that person explaining the issues, and asking 
that something be done.  Some of those notes will contain technical 
information regarding screen readers and what formats are accessible, so 
that the editor knows what is at stake.
this would be the most direct and most tactful way of dealing with this 
issue.

73
Colin, V A6BS