Well if I never read another BGR account I will still die happy but:
i) the editor relies on voluntary contributions
ii) every editor is different and they change things. I have submitted pieces to eight of them and while I might think some editors have been "better" than others there isn't a huge market for articles about fell running so you have to bear with it until matters improve
iii) The Fellrunner is a broad church. I once casually commented to one editor that I found one writer's contributions to be unreadable and was told - quite rightly - that some readers thought his articles were the best thing in the magazine. So that was me told!
iv) A good editor should believe they are trying to serve the broader interests of the membership - and not think the magazine is a vehicle for personal vanity - and fortunately most of them have
v) I have written elsewhere about changes in content over the last 50 years. There really wasn't much coverage of ultra-running events etc 40 years ago because there weren't many such events; and there is a limit to how many articles can be published on, say, races over Pendle; and anyway Bill Smith has already written them.
So, I am just grateful that for 50 years someone has always been willing to take on such a demanding role in which Neil Denby edited 29 issues (ie over 9 years), Britta Sendlehofer 21 issues (7 years) whereas the last three editors have only managed a total of 18 issues between them.
Things change.