It looks to me as though everyone has missed the point of the original post on this thread. A remider:
...why the need has emerged for the seemingly redundant callout of QNH in addition to the ATIS identifier most recently monitored. I thought that copying the ATIS, and confirming it on initial callup, conveyed that the requisite info, ie wx status - and QNH - had been received?
Whilst it is of little real importance due to the seemingly miniscule extra effort needed, the point is that we are constantly being told to keep it as short and concise as possible yet here we have an anomaly where we are asked to repeat something we have already acknowledged we have received!
It would appear to me that the original posts was referring to the habit of being asked to repeat the QNH when acknowledging receipt of ATIS when INITIALLY contacting CLEARANCE DELIVERY or APPROACH. Most of you know how it goes:
YOU: "Megaplane 123, B744, gate 45, information 'Q', requesting clearance for New Francisco".
CLNC DEL: "Megaplane 123, information 'Q' current. Cleared to New Francisco. Boviley 3 Alpha. Squark 6543. QNH 1013".
(Thinking to yourself, if he/she has just agreed that ATIS information 'Q' is current, why repeat the QNH?)
YOU: "Megaplane 123 is cleared to New Francisco, Boviley 3 Alpha, squark 6543".
CLNC DEL: "Megaplane 123, readback correct. QNH 1013".
YOU: "Megaplane 123 affirm. QNH 1013"
(thinking to yourself, why on earth has he/she asked me to read back the QNH when they have acknowledged that the ATIS I confirmed as having received is the current one.)
It all boils down to the extra few seconds it takes to confirm something you have already confirmed as having received. There are more important things in life and this is just one of those small irritations that don't help when it is not clear why they have to do it.