| |
Main
Date: 27 Jul 2007 15:47:45
From: Les
Subject: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
"Entrants are also encouraged to nominate their favorite "celebrity" to have
a star named after them through a partnership with International Star
Registry. Following the contest, Celestron will announce the people's choice
for the celebrity star naming and the Star Registry will make the new name
official."
http://www.celestron.com/c2/news_view.php?NewsID=34
|
|
| |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 17:45:56
From: Rich
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
On Jul 27, 10:47 am, "Les" <ln...@sun23dog.takeaway23.clara.co.uk >
wrote:
> "Entrants are also encouraged to nominate their favorite "celebrity" to have
> a star named after them through a partnership with International Star
> Registry. Following the contest, Celestron will announce the people's choice
> for the celebrity star naming and the Star Registry will make the new name
> official."
>
> http://www.celestron.com/c2/news_view.php?NewsID=34
Disgusting. But then they aren't really Celestron anymore, they are
an arm of a Chinese marketing company.
|
| |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 14:06:43
From: Pat
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
On Jul 30, 10:12 am, Greg Crinklaw <theskyhoundyour...@yahoo.com >
wrote:
> AstroApp wrote:
> > On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:47:45 +0100, "Les"
> > <ln...@sun23dog.takeaway23.clara.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> Enjoy your witch hunt then. What you people are doing is wrong!
Greg, have you ever issued a statement to the effect that you have no
business association with the ISR? I don't think I've seen such in
this discussion, and it seems somehow apropos.
|
| | |
Date: 07 Aug 2007 13:26:43
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Pat wrote:
> On Jul 30, 10:12 am, Greg Crinklaw <theskyhoundyour...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>> AstroApp wrote:
>>> On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:47:45 +0100, "Les"
>>> <ln...@sun23dog.takeaway23.clara.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> Enjoy your witch hunt then. What you people are doing is wrong!
>
> Greg, have you ever issued a statement to the effect that you have no
> business association with the ISR? I don't think I've seen such in
> this discussion, and it seems somehow apropos.
As I do not hide behind an alias it is well known what my business
affiliations are. Not only that, but had you truly been reading you
would already have your answer.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| |
Date: 01 Aug 2007 03:01:14
From: ngc457
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
On Aug 1, 3:43 am, Chris L Peterson <c...@alumni.caltech.edu > wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 19:12:59 -0700, ngc457 <ngc...@mailinator.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Celestron should have collaborated with the Minor Planet Center to
> >help name an asteroid, that would have been way cool. Naming stars is
> >so lame. The last person who asked me to find their star I told them
> >to get the hell away from me. Anyone stupid enough to buy a star
> >doesn't deserve to look through my telescope.
>
> The average person has no way to know that they can't buy a star name.
> Certainly, ISR markets their product in a way that makes it very unclear
> that the name isn't official. And some of these people received their
> certificates as gifts (including Phil Plait... is he stupid as well?)
Of course he isn't! :-) I determine stupidity by the recipient's
actions. I certainly don't expect Phil to turn up at my scope and ask
to see his star, or badger me about astrology, or insist that the
Earth is 6,000 years old (I've heard 'em all). An intelligent
recipient would either a) thank the sender for the kind thought and
then quietly discard the document or b) thank the sender for the kind
thought and then tell them the truth about the ISR such that they
don't repeat their bonehead mistake again.
> However, even assuming they are stupid, is that any reason to be rude to
> them? You must be a charming person to be around.
On the contrary, I am a very easy-going "quiet-type" who only
explosively erupts when asked *really* stupid questions. I have
patience for people with ignorant questions. I do not have patience
whatsoever for people with stupid questions (those people who clearly
lack critical-thinking skills).
> Thinking about where you seem to fall on the standard curve, I expect you are much more
> likely to meet people smarter than yourself then dumber. I hope they
> aren't as condescending to you as you are to others.
I am only ever condescending to those non-skeptical people. In the
company of people smarter than myself, I would hope that they would
set me straight if they caught me asking unscientific questions, or
questions that can be easily answered by a trivial bit of research.
|
| |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 19:12:59
From: ngc457
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Celestron should have collaborated with the Minor Planet Center to
help name an asteroid, that would have been way cool. Naming stars is
so lame. The last person who asked me to find their star I told them
to get the hell away from me. Anyone stupid enough to buy a star
doesn't deserve to look through my telescope.
|
| | |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 21:03:34
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
ngc457 wrote:
> Celestron should have collaborated with the Minor Planet Center to
> help name an asteroid, that would have been way cool. Naming stars is
> so lame. The last person who asked me to find their star I told them
> to get the hell away from me. Anyone stupid enough to buy a star
> doesn't deserve to look through my telescope.
Nice troll. I like your style a lot better than that other troller
(mick, etc.), who I think may actually have a mental illness. He's
merely disruptive with no style to redeem him. Your trolls are usually
just silly enough that its like, "I can't believe they fell for that!"
Somewhat entertaining, actually.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 20:57:35
From: Margo Schulter
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Please let me comment, in agreement with some thoughtful comments
on various "sides" of the question, that people who "buy" or
"register" stars as a gift or tribute for a loved one are
expressing human motivations we should all be able to
understand if not share -- and the question is how they
might best fulfill their desires while learning more about
astronomy and possibly also supporting a good cause.
A number of planetaria (or planetariums if you prefer) offer
"Adopt-a-Star" programs or campaigns which incorporate some
features of the commercial "registries" and appeal to similar
motivations -- but with a number of advantages.
The stars offered for adoption, typically for some set period
such as a year or several years, are either visible to the naked
eye or at least easy to find with binoculars. A planetarium or
observatory may specifically invite participants to come and
request to see their adopted star with the help of staff.
Educational materials are often included as part of the
arrangement for the donation and adoption. It's also made
clear that this is a question of adopting a star, not of
owning or officially naming or registering it. However, some
institutions will keep a permanent record of the adoption,
as well as provide a nice certificate.
Thus I'd advocate respecting the motivations people have for
this kind of transaction, while gently informing them of the
opportunity to adopt a star, or let others know about this
option, while supporting a planetarium or observatory and
learning more about the fascinating science and art of
astronomy.
It's unfortunate that Celestron didn't strike up a partnership
with one of these "Adopt-a-Star" programs -- and maybe they
could it now and set off on a better path.
It seems to me that the best response to the commercial
companies is more "Adopt-a-Star" programs of our own, made
more visible on forums like the World Wide Web.
Most appreciatively,
Margo Schulter
mschulter@calweb.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 05 Aug 2007 14:52:05
From: Starlord
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
heck, i could start up a progame too.
--
There are those who believe that life here, began out there, far across the
universe, with tribes of humans, who may have been the forefathers of the
Egyptians, or the Toltecs, or the Mayans. Some believe that they may yet be
brothers of man, who even now fight to survive, somewhere beyond the
heavens.
The Lone Sidewalk Astronomer of Rosamond
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
Sidewalk Astronomy
www.sidewalkastronomy.info
The Church of Eternity
http://home.inreach.com/starlord/church/Eternity.html
AD World
http://www.adworld.netfirms.com/
"Margo Schulter" <mschulter@web1.calweb.com > wrote in message
news:46b639bf$0$5148$d368eab@news.calweb.com...
> Please let me comment, in agreement with some thoughtful comments
> on various "sides" of the question, that people who "buy" or
> "register" stars as a gift or tribute for a loved one are
> expressing human motivations we should all be able to
> understand if not share -- and the question is how they
> might best fulfill their desires while learning more about
> astronomy and possibly also supporting a good cause.
>
> A number of planetaria (or planetariums if you prefer) offer
> "Adopt-a-Star" programs or campaigns which incorporate some
> features of the commercial "registries" and appeal to similar
> motivations -- but with a number of advantages.
>
> The stars offered for adoption, typically for some set period
> such as a year or several years, are either visible to the naked
> eye or at least easy to find with binoculars. A planetarium or
> observatory may specifically invite participants to come and
> request to see their adopted star with the help of staff.
> Educational materials are often included as part of the
> arrangement for the donation and adoption. It's also made
> clear that this is a question of adopting a star, not of
> owning or officially naming or registering it. However, some
> institutions will keep a permanent record of the adoption,
> as well as provide a nice certificate.
>
> Thus I'd advocate respecting the motivations people have for
> this kind of transaction, while gently informing them of the
> opportunity to adopt a star, or let others know about this
> option, while supporting a planetarium or observatory and
> learning more about the fascinating science and art of
> astronomy.
>
> It's unfortunate that Celestron didn't strike up a partnership
> with one of these "Adopt-a-Star" programs -- and maybe they
> could it now and set off on a better path.
>
> It seems to me that the best response to the commercial
> companies is more "Adopt-a-Star" programs of our own, made
> more visible on forums like the World Wide Web.
>
> Most appreciatively,
>
> Margo Schulter
> mschulter@calweb.com
>
|
| | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 17:41:39
From: Margo Schulter
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Starlord <starlord@sidewalkastronomy.info > wrote:
> heck, i could start up a progame too.
>
>
Starlord, I suspect that your program would be a good
one.
Are you involved with any local astronomical society?
This might be a good way for your group to become
more visible on the Internet as well as get more people
interested in astronomy and maybe raise funds for a
new or better observatory or other projects.
Best,
Margo
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 06 Aug 2007 11:37:18
From: Starlord
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
I said that as joke, I woiwouls hav to by somw hubbel photos and even then i
wount know their place int the othrer oter han what i can see.
--
There are those who believe that life here, began out there, far across the
universe, with tribes of humans, who may have been the forefathers of the
Egyptians, or the Toltecs, or the Mayans. Some believe that they may yet be
brothers of man, who even now fight to survive, somewhere beyond the
heavens.
The Lone Sidewalk Astronomer of Rosamond
Telescope Buyers FAQ
http://home.inreach.com/starlord
Sidewalk Astronomy
www.sidewalkastronomy.info
The Church of Eternity
http://home.inreach.com/starlord/church/Eternity.html
AD World
http://www.adworld.netfirms.com/
"Margo Schulter" <mschulter@web1.calweb.com > wrote in message
news:46b75d53$0$27292$d368eab@news.calweb.com...
> Starlord <starlord@sidewalkastronomy.info> wrote:
>> heck, i could start up a progame too.
>>
>>
>
> Starlord, I suspect that your program would be a good
> one.
>
> Are you involved with any local astronomical society?
> This might be a good way for your group to become
> more visible on the Internet as well as get more people
> interested in astronomy and maybe raise funds for a
> new or better observatory or other projects.
>
> Best,
>
> Margo
>
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 08 Aug 2007 19:10:15
From: Margo Schulter
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Starlord <starlord@sidewalkastronomy.info > wrote:
> I said that as joke, I woiwouls hav to by somw hubbel photos and even then i
> wount know their place int the othrer oter han what i can see.
Hi, Starlord, and please let me confirm that I did understand your
comment as a joke. However, I meant to be semi-serious as well as
highly complimentary in saying that it might be a fine idea for
an astronomical society to have an "Adopt-a-Star" program.
If I were organizing this, one thing I would do differently from
many of the planetarium or observatory campaigns I have seen on
the Web is to let each person who wants to participate choose
_any_ star, or DSO for that matter -- so that exclusivity wouldn't
be an issue. If 20 people want to adopt M31 or dedicate it to a
loved one, fine -- I wonder how many lifeforms and civilizations
are already inhabiting that galaxy, so 20 more distant admirers
shouldn't do any harm <grin >.
Maybe such a program could offer T-shirts as well as personalized
star charts and photos for the chosen object -- at a certain level
of donation, also a nice astronomy book, or pair of binoculars,
etc.
Let go of the "exclusive" idea -- even for a limited term such as
one or several years -- and everyone can adopt or dedicate exactly
what they want, with the program offering tips or suggestions to
people unfamiliar with astronomy.
A company like Celestron could also use it as a kind of "special
offer" for their advertising campaigns: get one of our telescopes,
and we'll throw in a T-shirt or certificate affirming your adoption
or dedication to a chosen recipient of your favorite star or DSO,
with a photo gallery on the Web to give people some ideas.
Both the nonprofit and commercial versions of this "adopt or dedicate
a star or DSO" theme avoid the problems of the "registries." I wonder
why Celestron didn't do it in this way: "win the contest, and we'll
dedicate the star or DSO of your choice to your favorite celebrity,
and send you a T-shirt with both a photo of the star or DSO and a portrait
of your celebrity, as well as a chart to help you find your object in
the night sky."
Any such promotion, of course, can and should make it clear that there are
scientific conventions for naming stars, DSO's, and other celestial
objects, with the IAU as the body responsible under international treaties
for specifying such designations. However a star or DSO, like a song, can
be adopted by or dedicated to anyone.
Most appreciatively,
Margo Schulter
mschulter@calweb.com
Lat. 38.566 Long. -121.430
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 08 Aug 2007 20:53:28
From: Ed Holden
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
"Margo Schulter" <mschulter@web1.calweb.com > wrote (Inter alia):
> Both the nonprofit and commercial versions of this "adopt or dedicate
> a star or DSO" theme avoid the problems of the "registries." I wonder
> why Celestron didn't do it in this way: "win the contest, and we'll
> dedicate the star or DSO of your choice to your favorite celebrity,
> and send you a T-shirt with both a photo of the star or DSO and a portrait
> of your celebrity, as well as a chart to help you find your object in
> the night sky."
How about an "Adopt-a-Starchild" program whereby Celestron provides
equipment to third-world children (and low-income U.S. families) who
have expressed an interest in astronomy but cannot afford to buy a
telescope? Just like wildlife adoption programs, adopters could keep
track of their starchild's progress etc. In return, the starchildren could,
where possible, do sidewalk astronomy (with appropriate adult
supervision, naturally) with their new equipment. Inspiring and developing
the next generation of stargazers without naming anything (other than their
new telescope).
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 09 Aug 2007 08:13:50
From: Margo Schulter
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Ed Holden <ed@home.com > wrote:
>
> How about an "Adopt-a-Starchild" program whereby Celestron provides
> equipment to third-world children (and low-income U.S. families) who
> have expressed an interest in astronomy but cannot afford to buy a
> telescope? Just like wildlife adoption programs, adopters could keep
> track of their starchild's progress etc. In return, the starchildren could,
> where possible, do sidewalk astronomy (with appropriate adult
> supervision, naturally) with their new equipment. Inspiring and developing
> the next generation of stargazers without naming anything (other than their
> new telescope).
Hi, Ed.
That sounds like a very constructive idea to me. It's interesting to consider
the range of environments ranging from urban to dark-sky where people might be
using those scopes in various parts of the world.
Best,
Margo
|
| | |
Date: 01 Aug 2007 02:43:13
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 19:12:59 -0700, ngc457 <ngc457@mailinator.com >
wrote:
>Celestron should have collaborated with the Minor Planet Center to
>help name an asteroid, that would have been way cool. Naming stars is
>so lame. The last person who asked me to find their star I told them
>to get the hell away from me. Anyone stupid enough to buy a star
>doesn't deserve to look through my telescope.
The average person has no way to know that they can't buy a star name.
Certainly, ISR markets their product in a way that makes it very unclear
that the name isn't official. And some of these people received their
certificates as gifts (including Phil Plait... is he stupid as well?)
However, even assuming they are stupid, is that any reason to be rude to
them? You must be a charming person to be around. Thinking about where
you seem to fall on the standard curve, I expect you are much more
likely to meet people smarter than yourself then dumber. I hope they
aren't as condescending to you as you are to others.
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
|
| |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 04:05:19
From:
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
On Jul 30, 7:26 pm, Greg Crinklaw <theskyhoundyour...@yahoo.com >
wrote:
> I'll try one more time: if people are happy with their piece of paper
> from the ISR, then why do we need to make them unhappy about it?
Suupose some con men are going door-to-door through my neighborhood
selling phony life insurance policies. Mrs. Brown, an elderly widow
who lives next door, tells me that she has bought one of these, and
what a great deal she got! Since she's "happy with her piece of
paper", should I not say anything to her? Of course not! It is my
*ethical duty* to help her by telling her that she has been conned!
Not because it makes me feel superior or "holier than thou" or
whatever, but to help her (hopefully) from being taken again, and to
not lend my tacit endorsement to the con men by not saying anything!
>What purpose does that serve other than make them unhappy?
It will help prevent them from losing money to the same scam again in
the future - ISR is not giving away these "star names" for free!
>What possible satisfaction could you drive from making them sad?
The satisfaction of knowing that I have *helped* them! Nobody relishes
the thought of having to dissapoint someone, but it is something that
must be done in this case! I do not see anyone here advocating doing
this in a cruel manner - these words and phrases you have used here
like "snobbishly", "haughtily", "derided as a fool", "barely able to
hide your disdain", "show how smart we are by puffing out our chests
and telling them that they are fools who have been had", etc. do not
reflect in any way the attitude I would adopt in handling the
situation, nor do I see anyone else suggesting doing likewise!
|
| | |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 09:49:41
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
allisonki@IGNmail.com wrote:
> On Jul 30, 7:26 pm, Greg Crinklaw <theskyhoundyour...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>> I'll try one more time: if people are happy with their piece of paper
>> from the ISR, then why do we need to make them unhappy about it?
>
> Suupose some con men are going door-to-door through my neighborhood
> selling phony life insurance policies. Mrs. Brown, an elderly widow
> who lives next door, tells me that she has bought one of these, and
> what a great deal she got!
There is one pivot point where this goes either way--where our views
depart. Is selling stars really such a scam? If you let go of the idea
that it is such a huge scam in the first place, then it isn't necessary
to burst people's bubbles. In fact it's disrespectful.
Imagine this: a person buys a star *after* you tell them that it is not
recognized by astronomers and that most astronomers think its a scam.
You go to them, surprised, and say, "Didn't I tell you it's a scam?"
What if they say, "I don't agree that it's a scam." What if they say
that it seemed like the perfect way to remember a loved one and that
they have framed their certificate and placed it on the wall? Is it
still a scam then? Are you duty bound to save them? Or is it simply a
transaction between two adults where both parties got what they wanted?
A transaction you don't personally approve of.
Before you go thinking that's a fairy tale, consider that there is a
another way to view these certificates: not as real property, but as
purely symbolic. Symbolism is powerful. People spend thousands of
dollars on beautiful caskets that will rot in the ground. Why? Is that
not a mortuary scam? I am sure someone out their views it that way.
Think about the guy who sells property on the moon. Do you really
believe that people are so gullible that they truly think he owns the
moon? Seriously? A lot of smart people have one of his moon lots on
their wall. People who are not gullible by any measure. Why? Do they
need saving? Are you smarter than they are? Better informed? Or do
they look at those lots differently than you do? Is it that perhaps
they see a value in them that is symbolic rather than real?
The thing we astronomers must recognize is that the star naming
companies are only half of the equation. Why, after all the efforts
that have been made by astronomers to rid the world of these companies,
are they still thriving? The answer is the one thing most astronomers
can't seem to grasp. It's that most of the people who buy them aren't
looking for something real. They are purchasing a symbol--an idea--no
more tangible than a funny drawing on an expensive greeting card, yet no
less important. We owe those people some respect. If they choose to
buy a star, then we are not saving them by telling them off, we are
merely being shallow and disrespectful.
This is not a black and white issue. If you wish to personally see
selling stars as as a horrible scam, fine. If you want to try to get
the DA's office to prosecute them, fine. If you want to bring a lawsuit
against them, fine. But other people have the right to believe that
these are not scams at all--that they are symbolic gestures, not real
property, and they darned well knew that going in. All I'm saying is
that they have a valid point of view and we should respect it.
Really, it comes down to this in the end: do we think people are
idiots--babes in the woods--who need us to save them? Or are they
adults who can think for themselves who may simply see things a little
differently than we do?
When it comes to the question of telling people they have been
scammed--forcing your view of the world upon them--it comes down to
tolerance and respect for your fellow man.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 18:50:49
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 09:49:41 -0600, Greg Crinklaw
<theskyhoundyoureye@yahoo.com > wrote:
>There is one pivot point where this goes either way--where our views
>depart. Is selling stars really such a scam?
I've stayed out of this argument, because it misses the point of my
original post. I didn't say that selling star names is a scam (although
it may be). What I said is that ISR is a sleazy operation, for a variety
of reasons, and that Celestron was tarnishing its own reputation amongst
astronomers by entering into any sort of association with them. I was
not attacking ISR, or people who buy star names from them.
If somebody came to me and asked to see "their" star, I certainly
wouldn't be unfriendly. First, I'd make it clear to them that what they
bought was just a certificate, not a star name with any standing. If I
had time, and it didn't interfere with other observing plans, I might
make an effort to point the scope at the object, assuming it could be
identified. I'd be more likely to do that if I sensed an educational
opportunity.
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 13:44:10
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Hi Chris,
That's certainly a very reasonable position.
Greg
Chris L Peterson wrote:
> On Tue, 31 Jul 2007 09:49:41 -0600, Greg Crinklaw
> <theskyhoundyoureye@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> There is one pivot point where this goes either way--where our views
>> depart. Is selling stars really such a scam?
>
> I've stayed out of this argument, because it misses the point of my
> original post. I didn't say that selling star names is a scam (although
> it may be). What I said is that ISR is a sleazy operation, for a variety
> of reasons, and that Celestron was tarnishing its own reputation amongst
> astronomers by entering into any sort of association with them. I was
> not attacking ISR, or people who buy star names from them.
>
> If somebody came to me and asked to see "their" star, I certainly
> wouldn't be unfriendly. First, I'd make it clear to them that what they
> bought was just a certificate, not a star name with any standing. If I
> had time, and it didn't interfere with other observing plans, I might
> make an effort to point the scope at the object, assuming it could be
> identified. I'd be more likely to do that if I sensed an educational
> opportunity.
>
> _________________________________________________
>
> Chris L Peterson
> Cloudbait Observatory
> http://www.cloudbait.com
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 13:41:39
From: Dennis Woos
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
> Before you go thinking that's a fairy tale, consider that there is a
> another way to view these certificates: not as real property, but as
> purely symbolic. Symbolism is powerful. People spend thousands of
> dollars on beautiful caskets that will rot in the ground. Why? Is that
> not a mortuary scam? I am sure someone out their views it that way.
>
> Think about the guy who sells property on the moon. Do you really believe
> that people are so gullible that they truly think he owns the moon?
> Seriously? A lot of smart people have one of his moon lots on their wall.
> People who are not gullible by any measure. Why? Do they need saving?
> Are you smarter than they are? Better informed? Or do they look at those
> lots differently than you do? Is it that perhaps they see a value in them
> that is symbolic rather than real?
If they buy them knowing they are symbolic then why even bother asking to
observe it in a scope? Furthermore, if they know they are symbolic only,
then why ask to see "Kathy's Star", as if astronomers are supposed to know
what that is? And if they know they are symbolic, then why get disappointed
when they are told that they can't observe it for whatever reason? I promise
not to post on this thread again - we have come full circle.
Dennis
|
| | | | |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 12:30:12
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Dennis Woos wrote:
> If they buy them knowing they are symbolic then why even bother asking to
> observe it in a scope? Furthermore, if they know they are symbolic only,
> then why ask to see "Kathy's Star", as if astronomers are supposed to know
> what that is? And if they know they are symbolic, then why get disappointed
> when they are told that they can't observe it for whatever reason? I promise
> not to post on this thread again - we have come full circle.
I meant symbolic in the sense that they own it or that the name the
purchased is somehow officially recognized by everyone.
As for seeing their star, my experience is that they are usually only a
tiny bit disappointed when I can't show it to them--as long as I don't
get visibly annoyed, tell them they've been scammed, and make them feel
like fools...
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| |
Date:
From: Martin Brown
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
|
| |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 16:13:05
From:
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
On Jul 29, 5:05 pm, Greg Crinklaw <theskyhoundyour...@yahoo.com >
wrote:
> If I can get one idea through to people it would be this: for many
> people these stars only become a scam when we label it as one. And we
> are not doing anyone a favor by doing so.
Yes, we are - *who else* is going to tell them that they've been
victimized, if not an astronomer who knows what a scam this is? And if
WE don't tell them when presented the opportunity, they are likely to
be victimized again!
|
| | |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 17:26:25
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
allisonki@IGNmail.com wrote:
> On Jul 29, 5:05 pm, Greg Crinklaw <theskyhoundyour...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>> If I can get one idea through to people it would be this: for many
>> people these stars only become a scam when we label it as one. And we
>> are not doing anyone a favor by doing so.
>
> Yes, we are - *who else* is going to tell them that they've been
> victimized, if not an astronomer who knows what a scam this is? And if
> WE don't tell them when presented the opportunity, they are likely to
> be victimized again!
Man.. this is soooo frustrating! Everyone here is so wound up about the
ISR that they can't seem to wrap their heads around what I'm saying. I
might just as well be speaking greek. Question your assumptions people!
I'll try one more time: if people are happy with their piece of paper
from the ISR, then why do we need to make them unhappy about it? What
purpose does that serve other than make them unhappy? What possible
satisfaction could you drive from making them sad?
In OUR WORLD this is a scam. But for many people buying a star is just
a simple symbolic gesture. We are in fact the ones who don't get it,
not them. They ought to tell us off by saying, "Who gave you the right
to name the stars anyhow?" In the end, does anyone really have that
right? I mean, does the star care if we call it "Beta Cyg" or Wally? I
would think that astronomers, of all people, would get that.
I personally prefer "Beta Cyg", but as far as I'm concerned any person
who wants to call it Wally is not going to hear a holier than thou
pronouncement from me. Particularly if that brings them out to look
through a telescope...
** Huge Sigh **
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 15:51:03
From:
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
On Jul 28, 11:59 am, Greg Crinklaw <theskyhoundyour...@yahoo.com >
wrote:
> I think you are being ridiculous to the point of silliness. This does
> no harm to anyone. It's not like they are supporting Nazis. It's just
> a little fun for their promotion. While I don't myself see the point in
> contests that revolve around celebrities (particularly those who are
> merely actors--there are a lot more important and interesting
> occupations) it's just a promotion. Get over yourself already.
Greg, you are 100% wrong about this.
The majority of the gullible people who purchase "star names" are
under the impression that astronomers use and recognize these names.
I've lost count of how many times someone has asked me to show them
the "Mary Smith" star, or the "Fred Jones" star, only to be
disapointed when I point out to them that no star atlas or catalog
used by astronomers uses these names. Their immediate reaction is to
feel like they've been conned, which is precisely the case - they were
led to believe they were purchasing a star name.
Peterson did not say they were "supporting Nazis". That's a ridiculous
straw man argument.
> As I've said before, I think astronomers who get all upset about the ISM
> are really just "protecting their turf" in a most irrational and vulgar
> way. The ISM provides a service that many non-astronomers enjoy and the
> really funny part is that they and their customers understand exactly
> what that service is: a symbolic gesture, nothing more, like buying a
> greeting card.
No true.
> It's only the irate astronomers (or physicists
> pretending to be astronomers like you) who don't get it!
We are irate because people are getting ripped off, and a lot of the
blame comes back on us astronomers for not "doing something about it".
> As far as I'm concerned, anything that arouses peoples interest in the
> sky is a good thing, and for a lot of the people who buy these stars, it
> marks the beginning of a journey toward learning about the Universe
> around them. At least until some narrow minded astronomer sends >them packing with his holier-than-thou pronouncements about the star >they bought!
What would you have us do? "Oh yes, let me check my Uranometria 2000.0
star atlas - here it is, the Mary Smith star! Yes, I've examined it
many times - fascinating object".
|
| | |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 17:35:17
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
allisonki@IGNmail.com wrote:
> On Jul 28, 11:59 am, Greg Crinklaw <theskyhoundyour...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>> I think you are being ridiculous to the point of silliness. This does
>> no harm to anyone. It's not like they are supporting Nazis. It's just
>> a little fun for their promotion. While I don't myself see the point in
>> contests that revolve around celebrities (particularly those who are
>> merely actors--there are a lot more important and interesting
>> occupations) it's just a promotion. Get over yourself already.
>
> Greg, you are 100% wrong about this.
>
> The majority of the gullible people who purchase "star names" are
> under the impression that astronomers use and recognize these names.
I disagree. I didn't just fall off a turnip truck you know. I've been
doing public events for 30 years. You are assuming this is true and
then forcing your assumption on the very people you believe are victims.
You are manufacturing victims in the process.
> Peterson did not say they were "supporting Nazis". That's a ridiculous
> straw man argument.
No -- misrepresenting what I said -- that's a ridiculous strawman. How
could you not comprehend that I was saying that he was treating the
issue like as something much more important than it really is?
>
>> As far as I'm concerned, anything that arouses peoples interest in the
>> sky is a good thing, and for a lot of the people who buy these stars, it
>> marks the beginning of a journey toward learning about the Universe
>> around them. At least until some narrow minded astronomer sends >them packing with his holier-than-thou pronouncements about the star >they bought!
>
> What would you have us do? "Oh yes, let me check my Uranometria 2000.0
> star atlas - here it is, the Mary Smith star! Yes, I've examined it
> many times - fascinating object".
You could do what I do. I never have any problems with these people.
Why? Because I respect their symbolic star purchase. I don't greet
them with a snarling attitude and tell them they are fools. I recognize
that they chose to express their fledgling interest in astronomy by
purchasing a star and I recognize that it is the star that brought them
to me in the first place. Most of all, I show them the respect they are
due. It is unbelievable to me that the people here cannot comprehend that!
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 10:01:48
From: palsing
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
On Jul 27, 7:47 am, "Les" <ln...@sun23dog.takeaway23.clara.co.uk >
wrote:
> "Entrants are also encouraged to nominate their favorite "celebrity" to have
> a star named after them through a partnership with International Star
> Registry. Following the contest, Celestron will announce the people's choice
> for the celebrity star naming and the Star Registry will make the new name
> official."
>
> http://www.celestron.com/c2/news_view.php?NewsID=34
It looks like the link has been removed, apparently Celestron has
succumbed to the pressure...
\Paul A
|
| |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 10:45:44
From: AstroApp
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:47:45 +0100, "Les"
<lnews@sun23dog.takeaway23.clara.co.uk > wrote:
>"Entrants are also encouraged to nominate their favorite "celebrity" to have
>a star named after them through a partnership with International Star
>Registry. Following the contest, Celestron will announce the people's choice
>for the celebrity star naming and the Star Registry will make the new name
>official."
>
>http://www.celestron.com/c2/news_view.php?NewsID=34
Heh. Now I don't feel quite as guilty as I did for a while, after
writing this rather bitter commentary on my website about a Celestron
ad campaign that made me grind my teeth.
http://home.earthlink.net/~8-h-haggis/jottings.htm#GOTO
I may have to add the stuff about the Int'l Star Registry, and --
particularly -- Clay Sherrod's followup comments at the end of it as
an update.
AstroApp/srw/big Celestron scope fan but not an uncritical one...
|
| | |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 09:12:10
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
AstroApp wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:47:45 +0100, "Les"
> <lnews@sun23dog.takeaway23.clara.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> "Entrants are also encouraged to nominate their favorite "celebrity" to have
>> a star named after them through a partnership with International Star
>> Registry. Following the contest, Celestron will announce the people's choice
>> for the celebrity star naming and the Star Registry will make the new name
>> official."
>>
>> http://www.celestron.com/c2/news_view.php?NewsID=34
>
> Heh. Now I don't feel quite as guilty as I did for a while, after
> writing this rather bitter commentary on my website about a Celestron
> ad campaign that made me grind my teeth.
> http://home.earthlink.net/~8-h-haggis/jottings.htm#GOTO
>
> I may have to add the stuff about the Int'l Star Registry, and --
> particularly -- Clay Sherrod's followup comments at the end of it as
> an update.
>
> AstroApp/srw/big Celestron scope fan but not an uncritical one...
Enjoy your witch hunt then. What you people are doing is wrong!
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 22:36:08
From: AstroApp
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 09:12:10 -0600, Greg Crinklaw
<theskyhoundyoureye@yahoo.com > wrote:
>> AstroApp/srw/big Celestron scope fan but not an uncritical one...
>
>Enjoy your witch hunt then. What you people are doing is wrong!
>Greg Crinklaw
To Greg, and everybody else who happens to be reading this thread:
I don't have to do so, but because I do NOT wish to be considered --
by anybody -- as being on a witch hunt, I just sent a cancel message
for my one short post previously contributed to this discussion, made
in the wee hours last night.
I had only read one or two posts in this long thread of (by now)
perhaps 50 contributions; and did not realize the nature of the heated
exchanges that have occurred. Furthermore, I did not fully appreciate
Greg's argument nor had read his followups and explanations. I agree
with a lot of what he's said about not going "overboard" and being too
serious and stuffy about an attempt to involve beginners. That being
said, I also have issues with the whole concept of 'selling stars'
too. I think I can see both sides of the argument.
I am not on a "witch hunt". I have "no horse in this race" for the
most part, and have told Greg privately that I had no idea that he
would take offense at my brief, sort of "after-thought" contribution
to this discussion. I actually have the utmost respect for the
dueling combatants on both sides of this issue.
I had made a little joke in one of my commentaries about this Star
Registry business, and in fact I've decided to take that out, too:
which I've just done. I am leaving this whole subject alone, as far
as MY website articles are concerned.
No need to antagonize anyone here about an issue that does not impact
my life significantly, one way or another.
Now, the reaction to one little remark of mine has illustrated the
"problem" with heated, protracted exchanges on this and other
newsgroups and forums. I came into this, looked at just the TOP of
it, and said something that seemed to imply that I was "in" on the
whole context of this argument, and "taking sides against Greg".
Nothing could be FURTHER from the truth!
Greg: I'm not a Celestron witch-hunter.
Other readers: forgive me for being overly sensitive and concerned
about the socializing side of such exchanges, for I am rather old, and
set in my ways: brought up LONG before the world wide web was a gleam
in the eye of Tim Berners-Lee...
I can't help but strive to communicate as if we are all FACE TO FACE
in a real astronomy club. If I get back a shocked, disgusted reaction
from a perfectly respectable person, there is no reason I wouldn't
want to try to find out WHY, and to re-think my own actions.
Steve Waldee - manager, Roper Piano Studio, San Jose/AstroApp
|
| |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 17:35:19
From: thad@thadlabs.com
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
On Jul 28, 11:08 am, Greg Crinklaw <theskyhoundyour...@yahoo.com >
wrote:
> t...@thadlabs.com wrote:
> > Oh? ICR's fraud seems actionable to me. As Doc Clay wrote in the
> > Meade-Uncensored Yahoo group Friday in article:
>
> > <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Meade-Uncensored/message/12952>
>
> If that's true then it is fraudulent. I've heard the accusation that
> they no longer sell real stars before. But I've also heard many other
> accusations and none of them turned out to be true...
>
> If you feel there is a case of fraud then why not buy a star and then
> contact the district attorney's office if it turns out to not be real?
> Or get together people who have purchased fake stars and start a class
> action lawsuit?
>
> Given how irrational people get about this practice in general, I
> wouldn't be surprised at all if the accusations are false, greatly
> exaggerated, or falsely attributed to the ISR (there are a number of
> known real scams out there operating under different names, I note your
> message refers to the ICR...)
> [...]
Oops; thanks. That was a typo (I had just used "ICR" in another post
and
meant to enter "ISR" above).
Red-faced. :-)
|
| | |
Date: 29 Jul 2007 01:01:17
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 17:35:19 -0700, "thad@thadlabs.com"
<thad@thadlabs.com > wrote:
>Oops; thanks. That was a typo (I had just used "ICR" in another post
>and
>meant to enter "ISR" above).
I kept typing "IRS" and having to correct it. An understandable slip,
perhaps, when discussing sleazy organizations <g >.
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
|
| |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 13:47:27
From: P. Edward Murray
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Oh and I guess you think it's totally ok to sell real estate on the
Moon huh?
Greg, it's called a SCAM and it's dishonest!
|
| | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 15:08:58
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
P. Edward Murray wrote:
> Oh and I guess you think it's totally ok to sell real estate on the
> Moon huh?
>
> Greg, it's called a SCAM and it's dishonest!
Is that you Shawn? Love the pseudonym. :-)
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 10:23:29
From: thad@thadlabs.com
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
On Jul 28, 8:59 am, Greg Crinklaw <theskyhoundyour...@yahoo.com >
wrote:
> Chris L Peterson wrote:
> > On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:47:45 +0100, "Les"
> > <ln...@sun23dog.takeaway23.clara.co.uk> wrote:
>
> >> "Entrants are also encouraged to nominate their favorite "celebrity" to have
> >> a star named after them through a partnership with International Star
> >> Registry. Following the contest, Celestron will announce the people's choice
> >> for the celebrity star naming and the Star Registry will make the new name
> >> official."
>
> >>http://www.celestron.com/c2/news_view.php?NewsID=34
>
> > That's revolting- right up there with them awarding a free horoscope
> > casting! I sent a reply to their PR contact at
> >http://www.celestron.com/c2/contact_pr.phpthat I will never consider
> > another Celestron product unless this promotion is ended immediately.
> > What an embarrassment!
>
> I think you are being ridiculous to the point of silliness. This does
> no harm to anyone. It's not like they are supporting Nazis. It's just
> a little fun for their promotion. While I don't myself see the point in
> contests that revolve around celebrities (particularly those who are
> merely actors--there are a lot more important and interesting
> occupations) it's just a promotion. Get over yourself already.
>
> As I've said before, I think astronomers who get all upset about the ISM
> are really just "protecting their turf" in a most irrational and vulgar
> way. The ISM provides a service that many non-astronomers enjoy and the
> really funny part is that they and their customers understand exactly
> what that service is: a symbolic gesture, nothing more, like buying a
> greeting card. It's only the irate astronomers (or physicists
> pretending to be astronomers like you) who don't get it!
> [...]
Oh? ICR's fraud seems actionable to me. As Doc Clay wrote in the
Meade-Uncensored Yahoo group Friday in article:
<http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Meade-Uncensored/message/12952 >
copy'n'pasted below:
" Curiously I have been asked hundreds of time to provide information
" ("real" information) on "stars" assigned by the Star Registry. Using
" every epoch (25 year intervals) from 1875 to 2025, on nearly all
" requests on "purchased stars" with specific RA and DEC
" designations, I could find NO star in the positions assigned fitting
" the criteria as outline in the spec sheet.
"
" I cannot believe that this outfit is still out there selling stars
" ... not even real ones.
"
" Dr. Clay
" -------------
" Arkansas Sky Observatories
" Harvard MPC/ H43 (Conway)
" Harvard MPC/ H41 (Petit Jean Mountain)
" Harvard MPC/ H45 (Petit Jean Mtn. South)
" http://www.arksky.org/
|
| | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 12:08:56
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
thad@thadlabs.com wrote:
> Oh? ICR's fraud seems actionable to me. As Doc Clay wrote in the
> Meade-Uncensored Yahoo group Friday in article:
>
> <http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/Meade-Uncensored/message/12952>
If that's true then it is fraudulent. I've heard the accusation that
they no longer sell real stars before. But I've also heard many other
accusations and none of them turned out to be true...
If you feel there is a case of fraud then why not buy a star and then
contact the district attorney's office if it turns out to not be real?
Or get together people who have purchased fake stars and start a class
action lawsuit?
Given how irrational people get about this practice in general, I
wouldn't be surprised at all if the accusations are false, greatly
exaggerated, or falsely attributed to the ISR (there are a number of
known real scams out there operating under different names, I note your
message refers to the ICR...)
The real shame in this is that if people would get off their high horses
this could be a huge boon to planetaria everywhere. Imagine if they all
got together, created their own registry, and sold stars to support
their efforts and to popularize astronomy.
The irony here is as thick as some peoples skulls! ;-)
Clear skies,
Greg
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 09:07:51
From: P. Edward Murray
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Greg,
No it doesn't harm?
It just more anti-intellectualism and that doesn't harm anyone anyway?
Your "does not harm" got us into Iraq, killed thousands of innocent
Iraqi citizens and Americans not to mention bankrupting our nation
to the tune of $12 Billion per month etc., etc., etc.
Sorry Mr. Crinklaw but your idea of does no harm has hurt us far
worse.
|
| | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 09:24:54
From: SkySea
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
>"P. Edward Murray" <ed1ward2@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>Greg,
>
>No it doesn't harm?
>
>It just more anti-intellectualism and that doesn't harm anyone anyway?
>
>Your "does not harm" got us into Iraq, killed thousands of innocent
>Iraqi citizens and Americans not to mention bankrupting our nation
>to the tune of $12 Billion per month etc., etc., etc.
>
>Sorry Mr. Crinklaw but your idea of does no harm has hurt us far
>worse.
>
Yes, exactly! That's what Greg was describing with, "...I think
astronomers who get all upset about the ISM are really just
"protecting their turf" in a most irrational and vulgar way."
Crimminy... the ISM is a pantload, but they are hardly resonsible for
deaths and bankruptcies.
It's such a serious world...
=============
- Dale Gombert (SkySea at aol.com)
122.38W, 47.58N, W. Seattle, WA
|
| |
Date: 27 Jul 2007 15:02:27
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:47:45 +0100, "Les"
<lnews@sun23dog.takeaway23.clara.co.uk > wrote:
>"Entrants are also encouraged to nominate their favorite "celebrity" to have
>a star named after them through a partnership with International Star
>Registry. Following the contest, Celestron will announce the people's choice
>for the celebrity star naming and the Star Registry will make the new name
>official."
>
>http://www.celestron.com/c2/news_view.php?NewsID=34
That's revolting- right up there with them awarding a free horoscope
casting! I sent a reply to their PR contact at
http://www.celestron.com/c2/contact_pr.php that I will never consider
another Celestron product unless this promotion is ended immediately.
What an embarrassment!
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
|
| | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 09:59:39
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Chris L Peterson wrote:
> On Fri, 27 Jul 2007 15:47:45 +0100, "Les"
> <lnews@sun23dog.takeaway23.clara.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> "Entrants are also encouraged to nominate their favorite "celebrity" to have
>> a star named after them through a partnership with International Star
>> Registry. Following the contest, Celestron will announce the people's choice
>> for the celebrity star naming and the Star Registry will make the new name
>> official."
>>
>> http://www.celestron.com/c2/news_view.php?NewsID=34
>
> That's revolting- right up there with them awarding a free horoscope
> casting! I sent a reply to their PR contact at
> http://www.celestron.com/c2/contact_pr.php that I will never consider
> another Celestron product unless this promotion is ended immediately.
> What an embarrassment!
I think you are being ridiculous to the point of silliness. This does
no harm to anyone. It's not like they are supporting Nazis. It's just
a little fun for their promotion. While I don't myself see the point in
contests that revolve around celebrities (particularly those who are
merely actors--there are a lot more important and interesting
occupations) it's just a promotion. Get over yourself already.
As I've said before, I think astronomers who get all upset about the ISM
are really just "protecting their turf" in a most irrational and vulgar
way. The ISM provides a service that many non-astronomers enjoy and the
really funny part is that they and their customers understand exactly
what that service is: a symbolic gesture, nothing more, like buying a
greeting card. It's only the irate astronomers (or physicists
pretending to be astronomers like you) who don't get it!
As far as I'm concerned, anything that arouses peoples interest in the
sky is a good thing, and for a lot of the people who buy these stars, it
marks the beginning of a journey toward learning about the Universe
around them. At least until some narrow minded astronomer sends them
packing with his holier-than-thou pronouncements about the star they bought!
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 21:45:59
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 09:59:39 -0600, Greg Crinklaw
<theskyhoundyoureye@yahoo.com > wrote:
>I think you are being ridiculous to the point of silliness. This does
>no harm to anyone...
The ISR is sleazy, regardless of whether they are actually doing
anything illegal (and they've certainly come close enough to illegal to
get themselves involved in a few serious investigations). They have also
used legal blackmail to go after completely non-commercial websites that
attempt to explain why you can't really buy a star from them. I'm quite
certain that the vast majority of astronomers, professional and amateur,
have very little respect for the ISR.
Celestron, on the other hand, is a company that most astronomers do have
a reasonable degree of respect for. And I would hope that Celestron, in
turn, respects the amateur astronomy community. Running a contest like
this (they go so far as to actually say that ISR will make the awarded
name "official") simply disrespects most of us. It's a stupid move on
the part of Celestron- one presumably coming from somebody in their
marketing department who simply doesn't know better.
I've written to Celestron, and so apparently have many others. And it
seems that our voices have been heard, because the ISR component of this
contest seems to have been removed. So Celestron heard, understood, and
reacted. Good for them!
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 02:20:27
From: Jerry
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Chris L Peterson wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 09:59:39 -0600, Greg Crinklaw
> <theskyhoundyoureye@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >I think you are being ridiculous to the point of silliness. This does
> >no harm to anyone...
>
> The ISR is sleazy, regardless of whether they are actually doing
> anything illegal (and they've certainly come close enough to illegal to
> get themselves involved in a few serious investigations). They have also
> used legal blackmail to go after completely non-commercial websites that
> attempt to explain why you can't really buy a star from them. I'm quite
> certain that the vast majority of astronomers, professional and amateur,
> have very little respect for the ISR.
>
> Celestron, on the other hand, is a company that most astronomers do have
> a reasonable degree of respect for. And I would hope that Celestron, in
> turn, respects the amateur astronomy community. Running a contest like
> this (they go so far as to actually say that ISR will make the awarded
> name "official") simply disrespects most of us. It's a stupid move on
> the part of Celestron- one presumably coming from somebody in their
> marketing department who simply doesn't know better.
>
> I've written to Celestron, and so apparently have many others. And it
> seems that our voices have been heard, because the ISR component of this
> contest seems to have been removed. So Celestron heard, understood, and
> reacted. Good for them!
>
We took delivery of our new C14 Fastar two weeks ago and
it is a total critical success so far, and a joy.
And now I read this thread and wonder - why and what does
this association mean, if anything.
Jerry
>
> _________________________________________________
>
> Chris L Peterson
> Cloudbait Observatory
> http://www.cloudbait.com
|
| | | | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 16:18:58
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Chris L Peterson wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 09:59:39 -0600, Greg Crinklaw
> <theskyhoundyoureye@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> I think you are being ridiculous to the point of silliness. This does
>> no harm to anyone...
>
> The ISR is sleazy, regardless of whether they are actually doing
> anything illegal (and they've certainly come close enough to illegal to
> get themselves involved in a few serious investigations). They have also
> used legal blackmail to go after completely non-commercial websites that
> attempt to explain why you can't really buy a star from them. I'm quite
> certain that the vast majority of astronomers, professional and amateur,
> have very little respect for the ISR.
>
> Celestron, on the other hand, is a company that most astronomers do have
> a reasonable degree of respect for. And I would hope that Celestron, in
> turn, respects the amateur astronomy community. Running a contest like
> this (they go so far as to actually say that ISR will make the awarded
> name "official") simply disrespects most of us. It's a stupid move on
> the part of Celestron- one presumably coming from somebody in their
> marketing department who simply doesn't know better.
>
> I've written to Celestron, and so apparently have many others. And it
> seems that our voices have been heard, because the ISR component of this
> contest seems to have been removed. So Celestron heard, understood, and
> reacted. Good for them!
While I don't necessarily disagree that the ISR is a bit sleezy, I still
think your reaction is bigoted and, well... reactionary. So you spoiled
their fun. Good for you! Kicked any dogs lately?
It's funny, whenever we have an argument--which seems to be a common
occurrence--you unfailingly try to paint yourself as one of the inside
crowd and me as an outsider. I don't really respect that. You may feel
there is strength in how many people appear to agree with you, but I
think it's pompous and ultimately carries little weight. It's part of
the reason I find it so easy to disagree with you, I guess. Just an
observation. (Some of us do that you know).
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | | | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 22:39:16
From: Sam Wormley
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Greg Crinklaw wrote:
> Chris L Peterson wrote:
>> On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 09:59:39 -0600, Greg Crinklaw
>> <theskyhoundyoureye@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I think you are being ridiculous to the point of silliness. This
>>> does no harm to anyone...
>>
>> The ISR is sleazy, regardless of whether they are actually doing
>> anything illegal (and they've certainly come close enough to illegal to
>> get themselves involved in a few serious investigations). They have also
>> used legal blackmail to go after completely non-commercial websites that
>> attempt to explain why you can't really buy a star from them. I'm quite
>> certain that the vast majority of astronomers, professional and amateur,
>> have very little respect for the ISR.
>>
>> Celestron, on the other hand, is a company that most astronomers do have
>> a reasonable degree of respect for. And I would hope that Celestron, in
>> turn, respects the amateur astronomy community. Running a contest like
>> this (they go so far as to actually say that ISR will make the awarded
>> name "official") simply disrespects most of us. It's a stupid move on
>> the part of Celestron- one presumably coming from somebody in their
>> marketing department who simply doesn't know better.
>>
>> I've written to Celestron, and so apparently have many others. And it
>> seems that our voices have been heard, because the ISR component of this
>> contest seems to have been removed. So Celestron heard, understood, and
>> reacted. Good for them!
>
> While I don't necessarily disagree that the ISR is a bit sleezy, I still
> think your reaction is bigoted and, well... reactionary. So you spoiled
> their fun. Good for you! Kicked any dogs lately?
>
> It's funny, whenever we have an argument--which seems to be a common
> occurrence--you unfailingly try to paint yourself as one of the inside
> crowd and me as an outsider. I don't really respect that. You may feel
> there is strength in how many people appear to agree with you, but I
> think it's pompous and ultimately carries little weight. It's part of
> the reason I find it so easy to disagree with you, I guess. Just an
> observation. (Some of us do that you know).
>
Hi Greg--
Many of us spend time attempting to educate the public about astronomy.
The public is effectively mislead by organizations using the phrase
"name a star"... it is a disconnect from the astronomy community, both
amateur and professional. And though not illegal, the public does get
mislead. I don't think my reaction is bigoted.
I gladly link to http://www.naic.edu/~gibson/starnames/isr.html as a
service to students, the amateur community and the public.
Regards,
-Sam
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 16:47:00
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Sam Wormley wrote:
> Hi Greg--
>
> Many of us spend time attempting to educate the public about astronomy.
And apparently I do not? Even after everything I've said? Forgive me,
but it takes a real ass to say that, Sam.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 29 Jul 2007 01:11:30
From: Esmail Bonakdarian
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Greg Crinklaw wrote:
> Sam Wormley wrote:
>> Hi Greg--
>>
>> Many of us spend time attempting to educate the public about astronomy.
>
> And apparently I do not? Even after everything I've said? Forgive me,
> but it takes a real ass to say that, Sam.
Hi Greg,
I've been following the thread, and I didn't think Sam implied what you
seem to think he did.
Sam has been around s.a.a. for a long time (like yourself) and his track
record in itself should prevent one from reading into the message what
you seemingly did (ugh, that was a contorted sentence - sorry).
FWIW, I think Sam summed it up very nicely by saying:
The public is effectively mislead by organizations using the phrase
"name a star"... <.. > And though not illegal, the public does get
mislead.
Would you agree with the above?
Who is to say/mandate what the right way to deal with those who "buy a star"
is? Everyone can make their own choice on how to handle this. I see no point in
the argument.
Esmail
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 21:03:58
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Esmail Bonakdarian wrote:
> Hi Greg,
>
> I've been following the thread, and I didn't think Sam implied what you
> seem to think he did.
Like I said elsewhere, I accept his explanation that it was just a poor
choice of words.
> FWIW, I think Sam summed it up very nicely by saying:
>
> The public is effectively mislead by organizations using the phrase
> "name a star"... <..> And though not illegal, the public does get
> mislead.
>
> Would you agree with the above?
No, I don't. There are problems with that statement, not the least of
which is that it isn't specific enough. Would this be true of *any*
organization that did this? Even a planetarium? I don't see what's
wrong with the practice as long as it is done on the up and up, and for
the most part, as far as I can tell, the ISR (I keep typing ISM) is
fairly legit. There are other organizations that are not, that much is
clear. But what I see is people going off half-cocked, often
misinformed, happily spreading false rumors, and rallying against things
that really are not what they think they are. It's like a witch hunt,
and that annoys me on principle.
The problem comes in the expectation. Some people here *assume* that
those who use this service are not getting what they pay for. But in my
experience that is certainly not true, at least for many. They know
exactly what they are being sold. The idea that it is recognized by
professional astronomers or some government body doesn't mean a thing to
these people. So who are we to get our knickers all tied in a knot
about it?
You might just as well complain about sending roses or a greeting card.
Stars are typically given as gifts, and this sort of sentiment isn't
about an "official star." It's about a symbol for a person--a monument
in the sky, or a recognition from one human being to another that they
care enough to understand that the stars and the sky mean something to
them. It's the thought that counts, not the piece of paper, or even the
star in the sky.
No--I don't see anything wrong with it at all. I would greatly prefer,
however, that the money generated via these means go to further
astronomy and not into the pocket of an entrepreneur.
Greg
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 20:26:23
From: Dennis Woos
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
> Sam Wormley wrote:
>> Hi Greg--
>>
>> Many of us spend time attempting to educate the public about astronomy.
>
> And apparently I do not? Even after everything I've said? Forgive me,
> but it takes a real ass to say that, Sam.
>
People who you know nothing about except that they don't agree with you are
"snobbish", show "disdain", etc., and yet you are hypersensitive and take
offense even when it is abundantly clear that none was meant. In all
sincerety, I wish you some clear skies and good observing - time to chill
out.
Dennis
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 18:48:06
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Dennis Woos wrote:
>> Sam Wormley wrote:
>>> Hi Greg--
>>>
>>> Many of us spend time attempting to educate the public about astronomy.
>> And apparently I do not? Even after everything I've said? Forgive me,
>> but it takes a real ass to say that, Sam.
>
> People who you know nothing about except that they don't agree with you are
> "snobbish", show "disdain", etc., and yet you are hypersensitive and take
> offense even when it is abundantly clear that none was meant. In all
> sincerety, I wish you some clear skies and good observing - time to chill
> out.
Whether or not it was meant as an insult (and I accept his explanation)
it sure read like one. I'm sorry you took my general comments about
people whose behavior is snobbish personally.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 22:56:36
From: Sam Wormley
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Greg Crinklaw wrote:
> Sam Wormley wrote:
>> Hi Greg--
>>
>> Many of us spend time attempting to educate the public about astronomy.
>
> And apparently I do not? Even after everything I've said? Forgive me,
> but it takes a real ass to say that, Sam.
>
I was only saying that I don't think *I* am bigoted fighting star naming
companies.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 22:31:30
From: Chris L Peterson
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
On Sat, 28 Jul 2007 16:18:58 -0600, Greg Crinklaw
<theskyhoundyoureye@yahoo.com > wrote:
>While I don't necessarily disagree that the ISR is a bit sleezy, I still
>think your reaction is bigoted and, well... reactionary. So you spoiled
>their fun. Good for you! Kicked any dogs lately?
Bigoted? Reactionary? You do like to make everything extreme. (I'm not
the one who introduced Nazis into the discussion <g >.)
>It's funny, whenever we have an argument--which seems to be a common
>occurrence--you unfailingly try to paint yourself as one of the inside
>crowd and me as an outsider.
I'm not surprised you read things that way. But I don't see it that way
at all. I think your strong tendency towards a hostile reaction to
anything you have the slightest disagreement with marginalizes you from
our community. You are doing a fine job of making yourself into an
outsider without my help.
_________________________________________________
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 16:41:19
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Chris L Peterson wrote:
> I'm not surprised you read things that way. But I don't see it that way
> at all. I think your strong tendency towards a hostile reaction to
> anything you have the slightest disagreement with marginalizes you from
> our community. You are doing a fine job of making yourself into an
> outsider without my help.
Oh -- ouch! Guess I touched a nerve.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 13:35:45
From: David Knisely
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
RE: "selling stars", Greg Crinklaw posted:
> This does no harm to anyone.
Oh really? How about the people who come to our observatory and want to
see the star which they "bought" to honor a lost loved one and which
also happens to be *permanently below the horizon* from where we are?
How about the ones who come to us with positions or charts that are so
bad that it is nearly impossible to determine with certainty which star
is "theirs"? How about those who come and find out that what they spend
their $54 to $139 for is just a piece of paper with no formal
recognition (despite what the FAQ says)? How about the telescope
operator who has to tell the person that they can't pull the scope off
of one of the assigned targets for viewing at public nights to go search
for "their" star? Yup, no harm, except to those who have to deal with
the consequences sometimes.
--
David W. Knisely KA0CZC@navix.net
Prairie Astronomy Club: http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org
Hyde Memorial Observatory: http://www.hydeobservatory.info/
**********************************************
* Attend the 14th Annual NEBRASKA STAR PARTY *
* July 15th-20th, 2007, Merritt Reservoir *
* http://www.NebraskaStarParty.org *
**********************************************
|
| | | | |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 02:12:26
From: KLM
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
David Knisely wrote:
> RE: "selling stars", Greg Crinklaw posted:
>
> > This does no harm to anyone.
>
> Oh really? How about the people who come to our observatory and want to
> see the star which they "bought" to honor a lost loved one and which
>
Exactly. Or a friend who comes to me as a friend, having lost
their thirteen year old daughter tragically, and wants a star in her
name, and which one should I get, will you help ......................
Tears my damned heart out!
Jerry
> also happens to be *permanently below the horizon* from where we are?
> How about the ones who come to us with positions or charts that are so
> bad that it is nearly impossible to determine with certainty which star
> is "theirs"? How about those who come and find out that what they spend
> their $54 to $139 for is just a piece of paper with no formal
> recognition (despite what the FAQ says)? How about the telescope
> operator who has to tell the person that they can't pull the scope off
> of one of the assigned targets for viewing at public nights to go search
> for "their" star? Yup, no harm, except to those who have to deal with
> the consequences sometimes.
> --
> David W. Knisely KA0CZC@navix.net
> Prairie Astronomy Club: http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org
> Hyde Memorial Observatory: http://www.hydeobservatory.info/
>
> **********************************************
> * Attend the 14th Annual NEBRASKA STAR PARTY *
> * July 15th-20th, 2007, Merritt Reservoir *
> * http://www.NebraskaStarParty.org *
> **********************************************
|
| | | | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 12:58:12
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
David Knisely wrote:
> RE: "selling stars", Greg Crinklaw posted:
>
>> This does no harm to anyone.
>
> Oh really? How about the people who come to our observatory and want to
> see the star which they "bought" to honor a lost loved one and which
> also happens to be *permanently below the horizon* from where we are?
> How about the ones who come to us with positions or charts that are so
> bad that it is nearly impossible to determine with certainty which star
> is "theirs"? How about those who come and find out that what they spend
> their $54 to $139 for is just a piece of paper with no formal
> recognition (despite what the FAQ says)? How about the telescope
> operator who has to tell the person that they can't pull the scope off
> of one of the assigned targets for viewing at public nights to go search
> for "their" star? Yup, no harm, except to those who have to deal with
> the consequences sometimes.
Sorry -- I still don't see the harm. Your logic is entirely circular.
Basically you are saying that it harms you because you have to deal with
it. But the only reason you see it as trouble, rather than the
opportunity it represents by bringing people to your public nights, is
because you hate the whole idea in the first place. Had it not occurred
to you that these people would otherwise not be there at all?
I'll bet you are one of those people who gets all dark and annoyed when
someone brings you one of theses stars, barely able to hide your
disdain. What a wasted opportunity! If so, then I submit that it is
*you* who is actually causing the harm. I sure hope not...
And why not show them their star? You guys really ought to be ashamed
of yourselves if that's how you treat people at your public nights!
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | | | |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 02:16:06
From: Jerry
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Greg Crinklaw wrote:
> David Knisely wrote:
> > RE: "selling stars", Greg Crinklaw posted:
> >
> >> This does no harm to anyone.
> >
> > Oh really? How about the people who come to our observatory and want to
> > see the star which they "bought" to honor a lost loved one and which
> > also happens to be *permanently below the horizon* from where we are?
> > How about the ones who come to us with positions or charts that are so
> > bad that it is nearly impossible to determine with certainty which star
> > is "theirs"? How about those who come and find out that what they spend
> > their $54 to $139 for is just a piece of paper with no formal
> > recognition (despite what the FAQ says)? How about the telescope
> > operator who has to tell the person that they can't pull the scope off
> > of one of the assigned targets for viewing at public nights to go search
> > for "their" star? Yup, no harm, except to those who have to deal with
> > the consequences sometimes.
>
> Sorry -- I still don't see the harm. Your logic is entirely circular.
>
No Greg. It becomes personal. And you know that as well as we
do. It is disappointment for a purchaser who thinks their loved one
is somehow enobled by a factual association (for eternity) with
some star! You have to explain what cannot be explained easily
to a family who have lost their daughter and now wind up in one
further piece of disappointment and hurt. It becomes personal.
Circular or not it becomes personal and of all the pople here you
should know that. David is right.
Jerry
> Basically you are saying that it harms you because you have to deal with
> it. But the only reason you see it as trouble, rather than the
> opportunity it represents by bringing people to your public nights, is
> because you hate the whole idea in the first place. Had it not occurred
> to you that these people would otherwise not be there at all?
>
> I'll bet you are one of those people who gets all dark and annoyed when
> someone brings you one of theses stars, barely able to hide your
> disdain. What a wasted opportunity! If so, then I submit that it is
> *you* who is actually causing the harm. I sure hope not...
>
> And why not show them their star? You guys really ought to be ashamed
> of yourselves if that's how you treat people at your public nights!
>
> --
> Greg Crinklaw
> Astronomical Software Developer
> Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
>
> SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
> Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
> Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
>
> To reply take out your eye
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 09:10:43
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Hi Jerry,
Jerry wrote:
>
> Greg Crinklaw wrote:
>
>> David Knisely wrote:
>>> RE: "selling stars", Greg Crinklaw posted:
>>>
>>>> This does no harm to anyone.
>>> Oh really? How about the people who come to our observatory and want to
>>> see the star which they "bought" to honor a lost loved one and which
>>> also happens to be *permanently below the horizon* from where we are?
>>> How about the ones who come to us with positions or charts that are so
>>> bad that it is nearly impossible to determine with certainty which star
>>> is "theirs"? How about those who come and find out that what they spend
>>> their $54 to $139 for is just a piece of paper with no formal
>>> recognition (despite what the FAQ says)? How about the telescope
>>> operator who has to tell the person that they can't pull the scope off
>>> of one of the assigned targets for viewing at public nights to go search
>>> for "their" star? Yup, no harm, except to those who have to deal with
>>> the consequences sometimes.
>> Sorry -- I still don't see the harm. Your logic is entirely circular.
>>
>
> No Greg. It becomes personal. And you know that as well as we
> do. It is disappointment for a purchaser who thinks their loved one
> is somehow enobled by a factual association (for eternity) with
> some star! You have to explain what cannot be explained easily
> to a family who have lost their daughter and now wind up in one
> further piece of disappointment and hurt. It becomes personal.
>
> Circular or not it becomes personal and of all the pople here you
> should know that. David is right.
No he's not. I don't understand why you guys can't see what's right in
front of your faces: it only becomes personal when we *choose* to make
it so. That's our conscious choice. That's what I mean by circular
logic. If you start from the position that the ISR is evil and must be
fought at every turn no matter the cost, then it does get truly ugly.
It gets ugly the moment a person happily walks into the observatory and
asks about his star only to be deflated and derided as a fool!
You people act like I've never done a public night myself. Greg just
doesn't understand... the thing is, I understand all to well. You can't
tell me anything I haven't already experienced with people who have
bought stars. Yet somehow, when I experience it, it doesn't get ugly.
I simply smile and use their star as a starting point to teach them
about the sky. Think about it.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | | | |
Date: 29 Jul 2007 02:29:53
From: David Knisely
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Greg Crinklaw posted:
> Sorry -- I still don't see the harm.
When the person who believes that they can name or "buy" a star feels
cheated when they find out the truth about how "official" this really
is, there can be a problem (even if you have not personally seen it).
> Your logic is entirely circular.
The logic is entirely straight forward. To some, the "name a star" idea
is a simple (albeit expensive) novelty gift, which is fine for those who
understand and accept this. To others, for whatever reason, they assume
that this name is somewhat "official" even though in reality, such
naming or purchasing has no formal recognition (other than to the star
naming outfit). This lack of understanding *has* caused problems, both
for those who did not fully understand what they were purchasing, as
well as those who have to deal with the emotional reaction from those
who, for whatever reason, are unable to deal with the actual fact of
the matter. People have reacted with anything from unemotional
acceptance, to tears, and even to anger (and yes, it is sometimes
directed at us). For just one example, there was one planetarium
director who had a man get really mad at him simply because he couldn't
show the man *his* star on the dome. The man wouldn't listen to the
director as he explained that the star was too faint to be placed on the
projector (it only goes to 5th magnitude). He wouldn't understand that
the points of light on the dome weren't even real stars. He just wanted
to see his star. There is nothing circular about this, but it is
sometimes an unfortunate consequence of those people who thought they
were buying something more significant than what it really is.
> I'll bet you are one of those people who gets all dark and annoyed when someone brings you one of theses stars, barely able to hide your disdain. What a wasted opportunity! If so, then I submit that it is *you* who is actually causing the harm. I sure hope not...
> And why not show them their star? You guys really ought to be ashamed of yourselves if that's how you treat people at your public nights!
*HOW DARE YOU*?!!! You do *not* know me at all, so you have absolutely
no right to make such a blatantly insulting statement! I have been
showing people the heavens for over 40 years at shopping malls, schools,
parks, from my driveway, and at our public observatory. I have put up
with sub-zero temperatures, odd hours, wall-to-wall crowds, and many
nights away from home just to give people a glimpse of the wonders that
lie above their heads. I drive 40 miles to open the observatory on
non-public nights for special school and children's groups so they can
experience something of astronomy (and I don't get reimbursed). I do
all this for fun and to give others a chance to see what I have seen and
not to lord it over someone as you might imply. I have never and *would
never* react in the way that you imply to *anyone* who brought me one of
their charts (and I have had more than a few do so), nor would the staff
of Hyde Observatory. I am proud of all the hard work the dedicated
volunteers who run Hyde have put in over the years serving the public,
and *you have no right to say (or even imply) they should be ashamed of
anything*!
I show the people who bring us these star naming products the
patience they deserve to help them as much as I can. I don't insult
these people or show any "disdain" towards them, but I won't lie to them
either. Many either know the truth to begin with or accept the truth
when they find out. However, some don't, and occasionally blame us for
their frustration because they just don't want to feel like they have
been duped. This is one reason we have hand outs on the subject of
star-naming, but even with the information provided, a few people who
have paid their money to these outfits can get a little testy.
As for showing them their stars, most of the time, we simply can't.
There are problems even figuring out which star is the one in
question (which is a point which you seem to have trouble
acknowledging). The stars charts for the "star name" outfits are often
crude, and the positions are not listed with anywhere near the accuracy
or equinox date to find them with certainty on one of our atlases, let
alone finding it on the real sky. Typically, they have a fairly
accurate right ascension, but the declination tends to be given only to
the nearest arc minute at best, which, along with the missing equinox
date, makes finding their "star" problematic at best even with the
charting software we have. My brother's wife was given a "star" but
even with MEGASTAR set to the proper magnitude limit, the information
given to her wasn't accurate enough for me to determine which of six or
seven stars of similar magnitude in the area of the position listed was
supposedly hers.
The ones being "assigned" now are quite faint (often 11th or 12th
magnitude) and would definitely take a while to locate even if we did
get an exact position. Only one of our scopes is Go-To equipped (and it
isn't the largest one). Even assuming we have an accurate position, we
can't just send our NexStar 11 to the exact position of the star, as the
pointing accuracy of the scope is rarely much better than 10 to 20 arc
minutes and the maximum field of view only 56 arc minutes. As for the
other scopes, they are purely manual pointing. It is a real problem
trying to find a particular 12th magnitude star amongst all the other
faint stars when viewing from inside a city of 200,000 (often with the
moon in the sky) and do it before a bunch of other people in line start
complaining. Also, the "named" star some person might want to see is
sometimes below the local horizon when they come to the observatory, or
is located a point where our scopes would be unable to acquire it even
if we knew exactly where it was (below the roof line of the observing
deck or even too far south to see at 40.778 degrees North). People
expect us as "astronomers" to just push a button and have their star
magically appear in the scopes, and some have difficulty understanding
that we can't usually do this. Oh, I could just point it to any star in
the general region of "their" star and say, "There it is", but that
would be dishonest.
With the public viewing nights, we have certain priorities, namely
to show the objects which we are featuring in our programs and advertise
that we will be showing. Rather than just allocate one scope for an
indeterminate time to one person's wish to see one dim point of light,
we have to consider the desires of the majority who wish to see
something else. Sure, *if* there are few people around on the deck and
*if* we can get an accurate position, then we *might* at least attempt
to show them "their" star, but doing this is definitely not very high on
our list of things we need to do.
We have been serving the public at Hyde Observatory for the past
28 years. Star naming for profit is a potentially harmful gimmick and
not really a service. Clear skies to you.
--
David W. Knisely KA0CZC@navix.net
Prairie Astronomy Club: http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org
Hyde Memorial Observatory: http://www.hydeobservatory.info/
**********************************************
* Attend the 14th Annual NEBRASKA STAR PARTY *
* July 15th-20th, 2007, Merritt Reservoir *
* http://www.NebraskaStarParty.org *
**********************************************
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 29 Jul 2007 09:50:50
From: SkySea
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
>David Knisely wrote:
...
>
>the matter. People have reacted with anything from unemotional
>acceptance, to tears, and even to anger (and yes, it is sometimes
>directed at us). For just one example, there was one planetarium
>director who had a man get really mad at him simply because he couldn't
>show the man *his* star on the dome. The man wouldn't listen to the
>director as he explained that the star was too faint to be placed on the
>projector (it only goes to 5th magnitude). He wouldn't understand that
>the points of light on the dome weren't even real stars. He just wanted
>to see his star. There is nothing circular about this, but it is
>sometimes an unfortunate consequence of those people who thought they
>were buying something more significant than what it really is.
...
It is unfortunate in dealing with the public that we encounter a large
portion of human reactions. It might help somewhat if the companies'
namings were compared to Monopoly money. It's valid for the game, but
you'd be laughed at (or arrested in today's world) if you tried to
pass it off in the real world.
But even if commercial star naming was recognized by the scientific
community, there are still the technical difficulties of finding the
darned objects. In the case you mention above, a little white lie
about which star is theirs could have been an option. He had more
demons to deal with than honesty alone could handle.
Ultimately, it would nice and convenient if the star companies went
away. But they're not, so we have to deal with the consequences.
How about billing the companies for time spent at the observatories
looking for objects? Of course, then you'd have to charge for
admission, and show that time spent is causing others to avoid coming
(loss of revenue). In the meantime, it sounds like martyrdom is in
order.
=============
- Dale Gombert (SkySea at aol.com)
122.38W, 47.58N, W. Seattle, WA
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 29 Jul 2007 09:49:54
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
David Knisely wrote:
> Greg Crinklaw posted:
>
>> Sorry -- I still don't see the harm.
>
> When the person who believes that they can name or "buy" a star feels
> cheated when they find out the truth about how "official" this really
> is, there can be a problem (even if you have not personally seen it).
>
>> Your logic is entirely circular.
>
> The logic is entirely straight forward.
[snip]
You right, the logic you presented above is straight forward. But the
logic you originally presented remains circular.
>> I'll bet you are one of those people who gets all dark and annoyed
>> when someone brings you one of theses stars, barely able to hide your
>> disdain. What a wasted opportunity! If so, then I submit that it is
>> *you* who is actually causing the harm. I sure hope not...
>
>> And why not show them their star? You guys really ought to be ashamed
>> of yourselves if that's how you treat people at your public nights!
>
> *HOW DARE YOU*?!!! You do *not* know me at all, so you have absolutely
> no right to make such a blatantly insulting statement!
Oh come off it. I simply reacted to what you yourself wrote. You are
right--I don't know you. All I have to go on is what you choose to write.
There is a simple choice: do we consider the stars these people bought
that bring them to your public nights an opportunity to educate them
about the sky? Or do we see it as an opportunity to show how smart we
are by puffing out our chests and telling them that they are fools who
have been had?
In your case I don't know the answer to that question. That's between
you and your conscience.
What I do know is that the same people who get all red in the face and
hotly tell people that their star is a scam that is not officially
recognized -- selfishly doing great harm -- tend to be the same ones who
get all bent out of shape at the very mention of the ISR on a newsgroup.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 29 Jul 2007 13:23:49
From: David Knisely
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Greg Crinklaw posted:
> You right, the logic you presented above is straight forward. But the logic you originally presented remains circular.
Its the same blasted logic as I posted before!
> Oh come off it. I simply reacted to what you yourself wrote. You are right--I don't know you. All I have to go on is what you choose to write.
>
> There is a simple choice: do we consider the stars these people bought that bring them to your public nights an opportunity to educate them about the sky? Or do we see it as an opportunity to show how smart we are by puffing out our chests and telling them that they are fools who have been had?
>
> In your case I don't know the answer to that question. That's between you and your conscience.
Yes, *you* clearly don't know anything, including how to interact with
people. Your choice of words shows that. You continue to imply that
there is something wrong about me with your bringing up my "conscience".
My conscience is just fine, thank you. I think yours should be
bothering you.
--
David W. Knisely KA0CZC@navix.net
Prairie Astronomy Club: http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org
Hyde Memorial Observatory: http://www.hydeobservatory.info/
**********************************************
* Attend the 14th Annual NEBRASKA STAR PARTY *
* July 15th-20th, 2007, Merritt Reservoir *
* http://www.NebraskaStarParty.org *
**********************************************
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 29 Jul 2007 15:05:40
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
David Knisely wrote:
> Yes, *you* clearly don't know anything, including how to interact with
> people. Your choice of words shows that. You continue to imply that
> there is something wrong about me with your bringing up my "conscience".
> My conscience is just fine, thank you. I think yours should be
> bothering you.
By the way this bothers you so much I can only assume that you *have*
disappointed people who bought a star by telling them its a scam--I
can't think of any other reason why you'd be so personally offended.
If so, then I hope you will rethink doing so in the future. That is the
entire reason I brought this issue to an argument. Maybe somebody out
there will realize that these stars can be seen as an opportunity rather
than an annoyance, and that maybe, just maybe, bursting their bubble
isn't a particularly kind or necessary thing to do.
If I can get one idea through to people it would be this: for many
people these stars only become a scam when we label it as one. And we
are not doing anyone a favor by doing so.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 29 Jul 2007 14:49:00
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
David Knisely wrote:
> Yes, *you* clearly don't know anything, including how to interact with
> people. Your choice of words shows that. You continue to imply that
> there is something wrong about me with your bringing up my "conscience".
> My conscience is just fine, thank you. I think yours should be
> bothering you.
Nice personal attack there, David. Real nice. I can tell you this:
based on the way people have responded to my logical arguments (citing
Nazis out of context, personal attacks, etc.) I think it's clear who won
this argument.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 07:53:10
From: David Knisely
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Greg Crinklaw posted:
> By the way this bothers you so much I can only assume that you *have* disappointed people who bought a star by telling them its a scam--I can't think of any other reason why you'd be so personally offended.
Don't assume anything Greg (that is what got you into trouble in the
first place). What bothers me is not whether someone purchases a star
name or not. What bothers me is what *you* said in your response. You
keep missing this.
> Nice personal attack there, David. Real nice. I can tell you this: based on the way people have responded to my logical arguments (citing Nazis out of context, personal attacks, etc.) I think it's clear who won this argument.
You have lost more than you know. You have lost the respect I once had
for you and your opinions. More importantly, you have lost much of the
validity of your arguments through the tactless form of your responses.
A personal attack? What did you do to *me*? The problem right now
isn't star naming or any such thing. The problem I have is with *you*.
*You* were the one who, without cause, ignorantly and blatantly
misrepresented who I am by saying:
> I'll bet you are one of those people who gets all dark and annoyed when someone brings you one of theses stars, barely able to hide your disdain
Again, you have *no* basis at all for such a statement, nor for the
subsequent statements about how we treat people on our public nights.
You made a totally uneducated assumption about me and then trotted it
out for all to see. You are the one who moved the discussion off into
the personal insult territory, and you have continued to do so with your
subsequent responses. Rather than apologize and try and get the
discussion back on topic through civil discussion, you still keep trying
to somehow defend what you said to "win" another argument. You show
behavior that is not much better than some of the less talented trolls
we see here. Thus, in my book (and in the book of many others) your
"argument" has been nullified.
--
David W. Knisely KA0CZC@navix.net
Prairie Astronomy Club: http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org
Hyde Memorial Observatory: http://www.hydeobservatory.info/
**********************************************
* Attend the 14th Annual NEBRASKA STAR PARTY *
* July 15th-20th, 2007, Merritt Reservoir *
* http://www.NebraskaStarParty.org *
**********************************************
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 10:20:38
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
David,
David Knisely wrote:
> A personal attack? What did you do to *me*? The problem right now
> isn't star naming or any such thing. The problem I have is with *you*.
I have burned into my mind a picture of someone I once knew. He worked
with the public at an observatory. He was a loud, obnoxious,
insensitive buffoon. When people would come to him, the mere mention of
buying stars would send him off on a tirade. And if someone brought him
their star he'd puff out his chest and haughtily tell them they had been
scammed, with no regard to their feelings. I would watch those people.
They would look a little disappointed and then smile make a feeble
joke about it. But afterward I'd watch their drawn faces, with all the
joy they had walked into the room with gone, and I started to despise
what this person was doing to them.
When I read your response you appeared to be drawing a picture of
yourself in that very same role. It made me angry. I said some very
harsh things--I lashed out at you as I had never had the chance to at
that buffoon long ago.
Look--I am very sorry that I disrespected you here on this forum.
If you would never think of acting in the manner I have described then I
am doubly sorry! Then we in fact agree that it is tactless and
disrespectful to burst people's bubbles at public events, and you were
simply relating your frustration in having to deal with the problem at all.
If you have in the past found yourself telling someone that they have
been scammed and seen the hurt on their faces--a hurt it is very easy to
blame on the ISR--then I would like to respectfully suggest that you
reconsider doing so. I admit that I did this a few times myself before
I realized that what I was doing was wrong. I truly believe that the
ISR only takes the money from these people. It is we who take their
dignity.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 08:59:34
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
David Knisely wrote:
> The problem I have is with *you*.
Oh, you've made that abundantly clear.
> *You* were the one who, without cause, ignorantly and blatantly
> misrepresented who I am by saying:
>
>> I'll bet you are one of those people who gets all dark and annoyed
>> when someone brings you one of theses stars, barely able to hide
>> your disdain
Of course, I also said:
> There is a simple choice: do we consider the stars these people
> bought that bring them to your public nights an opportunity to
> educate them about the sky? Or do we see it as an opportunity to
> show how smart we are by puffing out our chests and telling them that
> they are fools who have been had?
>
> In your case I don't know the answer to that question.
Funny how you continue to ignore it. Funny how you *choose* to ignore
it. I suppose ignoring it helps you justify your personal attacks.
Tell me this, do you agree or not? You have never once said that you
aren't bursting people's bubbles in the way I suggest, and your own
words seem to indicate that you do. If you are so mortally offended
that I even *implied* that you are (and that's all I did) then why not
simply clear the air?
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 29 Jul 2007 15:00:23
From: Howard Lester
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
"Greg Crinklaw" wrote
> Nice personal attack there, David. Real nice. I can tell you this: based
> on the way people have responded to my logical arguments (citing Nazis out
> of context, personal attacks, etc.) I think it's clear who won this
> argument.
so sad....
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 29 Jul 2007 16:10:33
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Howard Lester wrote:
> "Greg Crinklaw" wrote
>
>> Nice personal attack there, David. Real nice. I can tell you this: based
>> on the way people have responded to my logical arguments (citing Nazis out
>> of context, personal attacks, etc.) I think it's clear who won this
>> argument.
>
> so sad....
I guess so. You were one of the few reasonable people on this thread.
Of course your comment could mean anything... care to elaborate?
I'd like astronomers to stop be jerks with this star registry witch
hunt. Most of all I wish they'd choose to show some respect to the
people who buy these stars... it saddens me to see that so many of the
regulars here apparently don't agree.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 29 Jul 2007 18:22:26
From: Marty
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
There are much worse evils in this world than the ISR. My own daughter
bought me an 11.5 mag star in Pegasus. That was nice of her, and I
appreciated the gesture.
However, I very much doubt that owning one of these stars is much
of a gateway into an interest in astronomy, any more than the share in a
played out silver mine I got as a kid on vacation back in the 50's
started me on an interest in geology. The most pathetic part of the
whole thing is that most of the people with new star names don't really
know what they're buying. One well meaning social services group bought
stars to give to the parents of recently deceased children. I doubt if
these people realized they were dealing with a novelty item. The ISR
also has a history of threatening planetaria and public observatories
with lawsuits for pointing all this out to the public. I haven't heard
of that happening recently, but it points out well how interested they
are in public education, and it soured me on them very effectively
Marty
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 29 Jul 2007 19:15:09
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Hi Marty,
Marty wrote:
> There are much worse evils in this world than the ISR. My own daughter
> bought me an 11.5 mag star in Pegasus. That was nice of her, and I
> appreciated the gesture.
> However, I very much doubt that owning one of these stars is much
> of a gateway into an interest in astronomy, any more than the share in a
> played out silver mine I got as a kid on vacation back in the 50's
> started me on an interest in geology. The most pathetic part of the
> whole thing is that most of the people with new star names don't really
> know what they're buying. One well meaning social services group bought
> stars to give to the parents of recently deceased children. I doubt if
> these people realized they were dealing with a novelty item. The ISR
> also has a history of threatening planetaria and public observatories
> with lawsuits for pointing all this out to the public. I haven't heard
> of that happening recently, but it points out well how interested they
> are in public education, and it soured me on them very effectively
Yes--those are the things "we all know." But are they really true? I
began my change of heart by asking myself that very question.
Assume for a minute that what they do *is* on the up and up. I know
that's extremely difficult for many people. But just play along.
Assume that they don't go out of their way to mislead people and that
the small print (an example of which is actually found on the front page
of their web site) clearly states exactly what people are buying.
If that is true, then a web site that makes the claim that they are
committing fraud is seen in a slightly different light, isn't it? It
would in fact be libelous. Do they not the have the right to defend
themselves by threatening legal action? Are there not two sides to
every story?
I have read all sorts of things about the ISR and many of them turned
out to be false or greatly exaggerated. I recall, for instance, one guy
who went on here about how they lied in their advertising with regard to
how official their registry was. Another person simply visited their
web site to see, and it turned out that they make no such exaggerated
claim.
I think people aren't generally as stupid as they have been made out to
be. I don't believe that the majority of people who buy these stars are
idiots who need us to come to their rescue. Others obviously disagree.
But I ask you, which position is ultimately more respectful?
What I ultimately discovered--to my horror--is that it has become
commonplace for astronomers at public events to denigrate the purchase
of these stars. It has become commonplace for astronomers to sound off
about how the ISR is a scam. I believe by doing so these astronomers
are being disrespectful of those in the crowd who may have purchased one
of these stars--often in remembrance of a loved one. It seems to me to
be incredibly insensitive for astronomers to do this. I have stated so
several times on this thread and do you know what? Not one person has
stood up to agree with me about that.
As Howard Lester said (in a an apparent insult): "How sad."
Of course, if someone came along and pointed out that I was behaving
like a jackass at public star parties, I'd probably not be very happy to
hear it either. So I understand why some have chosen to shoot the
messenger (me).
I think it's time that astronomers reconsider their vehement opposition
to the ISR, if for no other reason than for the sake of the feelings of
their customers. If we don't feel the ISR has a right to sell stars,
fine. But maybe we should stop short of hyperbolic claims to Celestron
that we'll never buy a telescope from them again because of a promotion,
like some little old lady from Iowa upset about something she saw on TV
that offended her sensibilities. And maybe we should be more sensitive
about going-off in public about it. The sad fact is that these stars
aren't considered scams at all by most of the people who buy them...
until one of us comes along and sets them straight. And is that really
necessary?
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 17:19:01
From: Marty
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Greg Crinklaw was saying
>Yes--those are the things "we all know."
> But are they really true? I began my
> change of heart by asking myself that
> very question.
Well, I have to admit I haven't been personally threatened with a
lawsuit by the ISR, and I don't know anyone in this part of rural Iowa
who has. However, I think it's more likely that this has happened than
a large part of the astronomical community just decided to heap scorn on
the ISR because nobody else should have anything to do with this
astronomy stuff.
>Assume that they don't go out of their
> way to mislead people and that the
> small print (an example of which is
> actually found on the front page of their
> web site) clearly states exactly what
> people are buying.
There was a recent thread in this group about how the ISR had put a
disclaimer on their website. The general consensus was "good for them"
although it was a little late.
I grew up in Nebraska. Many successful businessmen, etc. have been
presented with a framed, legal looking, certificate stating that they
are an "Admiral in the Great Nebraska Navy" or something to that effect,
(which is rather funny when you think about it.) Everyone knows it's
more or less a joke. No harm done. None of these people expect to be
able to command a fleet of ships on the Platte River. Many people
however, think that they really have officially had a star named after
them or a deceased loved one.
>If that is true, then a web site that makes
> the claim that they are committing fraud
> is seen in a slightly different light, isn't
> it? It would in fact be libelous. Do they
> not the have the right to defend
> themselves by threatening legal action?
> Are there not two sides to every story?
Like I said, they now have a disclaimer on their website. They didn't
used to... I once looked for one and found nothing. Also, there have
been other companies selling star names that did state the nature of
their product. I haven't heard anything on their radio ads to imply
that their star names aren't recognized by anyone. Maybe I'll have to
listen harder the next time one comes around.
I DO think that astronomers should use some amount of tact when
dealing with someone who has bought a star name. Nothing is gained by
making someone feel like a sucker, and some of these people actually do
feel like they've purchased some eternal memorial for a loved one.
However, I can also understand the anger of a person who works with the
public who has been put in this position. I personally wouldn't want to
hurt someone's feelings, but on the other hand, I wouldn't feel like
giving the company that took 50 bucks and put me in that position a free
pass.
Like I said before, there are much greater evils in this world than
the ISR. My brother interviewed ISR's Rocky Moselle for a radio spot,
and he seemed like a decent sort of guy. He had a good laugh when my
brother mentioned my request to have the Sun named after me. Many
people do know that their star is nothing more than a novelty. Many,
however, have been led to believe it's more than that. The general
public knows little about how such things work, and it's easy to take a
person's 50 dollars and, (woops.) just let them believe.
Marty
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 15:01:38
From: Night Owl
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 17:19:01 -0500, movac5@webtv.net (Marty) wrote the
following in sci.astro.amateur:
Here's an good article in the Skeptical Inquirer on the subject for
anyone that's interested.
http://www.csicop.org/si/2006-05/stars.html
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 23:48:41
From: Sam Wormley
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Night Owl wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2007 17:19:01 -0500, movac5@webtv.net (Marty) wrote the
> following in sci.astro.amateur:
>
>
> Here's an good article in the Skeptical Inquirer on the subject for
> anyone that's interested.
>
> http://www.csicop.org/si/2006-05/stars.html
>
>
Quoting from the above....
"The New York Office of Consumer Affairs certainly felt this way. It
levied an injunction against the ISR for using deceptive advertising
in New York City, and the ISR was found guilty on multiple counts,
with fines up to $3,500 (a tiny fraction, of course, of the company’s
income). The Federal Trade Commission weighed in, forbidding the ISR
from using the Library of Congress in its ads too. This small road
block hasn’t even slowed down the ISR. It still advertises, mostly
around Christmas (though the ads no longer mention the Library of
Congress)".
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 16:37:33
From: David Knisely
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Night Owl posted:
> Here's an good article in the Skeptical Inquirer on the subject for
> anyone that's interested.
>
> http://www.csicop.org/si/2006-05/stars.html
Phil does a pretty good job of covering the issue of "star naming" in
that article, including mentioning some of the problems involved when
people want to see "their star" at planetaria or observatories. It
makes a good read. Clear skies to you.
--
David W. Knisely KA0CZC@navix.net
Prairie Astronomy Club: http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org
Hyde Memorial Observatory: http://www.hydeobservatory.info/
**********************************************
* Attend the 14th Annual NEBRASKA STAR PARTY *
* July 15th-20th, 2007, Merritt Reservoir *
* http://www.NebraskaStarParty.org *
**********************************************
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 00:38:49
From: Sam Wormley
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Marty wrote:
> Greg Crinklaw was saying
>> Yes--those are the things "we all know."
>> But are they really true? I began my
>> change of heart by asking myself that
>> very question.
>
> Well, I have to admit I haven't been personally threatened with a
> lawsuit by the ISR, and I don't know anyone in this part of rural Iowa
> who has. However, I think it's more likely that this has happened than
> a large part of the astronomical community just decided to heap scorn on
> the ISR because nobody else should have anything to do with this
> astronomy stuff.
>> Assume that they don't go out of their
>> way to mislead people and that the
>> small print (an example of which is
>> actually found on the front page of their
>> web site) clearly states exactly what
>> people are buying.
>
> There was a recent thread in this group about how the ISR had put a
> disclaimer on their website. The general consensus was "good for them"
> although it was a little late.
> I grew up in Nebraska. Many successful businessmen, etc. have been
> presented with a framed, legal looking, certificate stating that they
> are an "Admiral in the Great Nebraska Navy" or something to that effect,
> (which is rather funny when you think about it.) Everyone knows it's
> more or less a joke. No harm done. None of these people expect to be
> able to command a fleet of ships on the Platte River. Many people
> however, think that they really have officially had a star named after
> them or a deceased loved one.
>> If that is true, then a web site that makes
>> the claim that they are committing fraud
>> is seen in a slightly different light, isn't
>> it? It would in fact be libelous. Do they
>> not the have the right to defend
>> themselves by threatening legal action?
>> Are there not two sides to every story?
>
> Like I said, they now have a disclaimer on their website. They didn't
> used to... I once looked for one and found nothing. Also, there have
> been other companies selling star names that did state the nature of
> their product. I haven't heard anything on their radio ads to imply
> that their star names aren't recognized by anyone. Maybe I'll have to
> listen harder the next time one comes around.
> I DO think that astronomers should use some amount of tact when
> dealing with someone who has bought a star name. Nothing is gained by
> making someone feel like a sucker, and some of these people actually do
> feel like they've purchased some eternal memorial for a loved one.
> However, I can also understand the anger of a person who works with the
> public who has been put in this position. I personally wouldn't want to
> hurt someone's feelings, but on the other hand, I wouldn't feel like
> giving the company that took 50 bucks and put me in that position a free
> pass.
> Like I said before, there are much greater evils in this world than
> the ISR. My brother interviewed ISR's Rocky Moselle for a radio spot,
> and he seemed like a decent sort of guy. He had a good laugh when my
> brother mentioned my request to have the Sun named after me. Many
> people do know that their star is nothing more than a novelty. Many,
> however, have been led to believe it's more than that. The general
> public knows little about how such things work, and it's easy to take a
> person's 50 dollars and, (woops.) just let them believe.
> Marty
>
Now I would like to hear this on their radio ads: "International Star
Registry star naming is not recognized by the scientific community.
Your star’s name is reserved in International Star Registry records only".
Your online "certificate" at http://edu-observatory.org/eo/marty.html
outshines those paper certificates from the the star registering companies!
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 31 Jul 2007 02:09:47
From: Esmail
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Sam Wormley wrote:
>
> Your online "certificate" at http://edu-observatory.org/eo/marty.html
> outshines those paper certificates from the the star registering
> companies!
very cool!
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 21:37:47
From: Marty
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Esmail wrote
>Sam Wormley wrote:
>=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Your online "certificate" at
> http://edu-observatory.org/eo/marty.html
> =A0 outshines those paper certificates from
> the the star registering
>companies!
>very cool!
Mom'll be SO proud!
Marty
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 17:37:43
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Marty -- thank you for your most reasonable response.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 20:27:45
From: Marty
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Greg Crinklaw was saying
>Marty -- thank you for your most
> reasonable response.
Hmm. If I didn't piss you off, maybe I wasn't clear enough...
Marty :D
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Date: 30 Jul 2007 14:06:12
From: lal_truckee
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Greg Crinklaw wrote:
>
> Yes--those are the things "we all know." But are they really true?
I just popped over to their website. They do claim to sell the customer
the right to "name a star" - something they can't provide by any measure
of "name a star."
I had thought they were getting a buck or two for their phony "star
naming" novelty - about right and no big deal - like buying an authentic
mounted Jackalope head. But they're getting $50 to $140, + $30 for a
book of phony star names. Now that gets to be a bit of money, especially
for the folks likely to be taken in by this kind of foolishness, and the
nature of their fraud becomes more serious.
Rather than mostly harmless nonsense, I now think they are crooks
engaged in fraudulent commerce.
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 29 Jul 2007 09:11:25
From: Howard Lester
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
"Greg Crinklaw" wrote
> What I do know is that the same people who get all red in the face and
> hotly tell people that their star is a scam that is not officially
> recognized -- selfishly doing great harm -- tend to be the same ones who
> get all bent out of shape at the very mention of the ISR on a newsgroup.
I've so far can recall just one person who has so far gotten bent out of
shape in this thread.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 15:22:33
From: Dennis Woos
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
> And why not show them their star? You guys really ought to be ashamed of
> yourselves if that's how you treat people at your public nights!
You must be kidding - even assuming that the star is visible and that the
coordinates are accurate which I read is questionable, you advocate making
the other folks in line wait while taking the time to re-point the scope to
look at a star which is indistinguishable from countless others? These "buy
a star" outfits are scams, and just because some of the scammed attend
observing events - which we all agree is a good thing - in an effort to see
"their star" doesn't make them any less of a bad thing. I think that whoever
set this up at Celestron is a knuckle-head, and that the company needs to
scrap it asap.
Dennis
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 13:45:26
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Dennis Woos wrote:
>> And why not show them their star? You guys really ought to be ashamed of
>> yourselves if that's how you treat people at your public nights!
>
> You must be kidding - even assuming that the star is visible and that the
> coordinates are accurate which I read is questionable, you advocate making
> the other folks in line wait while taking the time to re-point the scope to
> look at a star which is indistinguishable from countless others?
Why not suggest showing it to them after everyone else leaves? And how
is such a request any different from someone asking to see the
Horsehead, or some other object that is famous yet difficult to see?
Do you snobbishly tell them off too?
I am deeply troubled by the attitudes I have read here.
These "buy
> a star" outfits are scams,
Says you.
and just because some of the scammed attend
> observing events - which we all agree is a good thing - in an effort to see
> "their star" doesn't make them any less of a bad thing. I think that whoever
> set this up at Celestron is a knuckle-head, and that the company needs to
> scrap it asap.
Do you people hear yourselves? I mean, really. I barely have to work
to make my point; the two of you have done a wonderful job of making it
for me.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 13:27:53
From: Howard Lester
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Greg, I wonder if you're missing some of the points made.
So far in this thread I've read that some stars are never visible from the
star-buyer's location. It would hurt me to have to tell that to the star
buyer, as I'd expect him or her to be bitterly disappointed. I've also read
that the charts provided aren't all that good, making it next to impossible
for the telescope operator to find it. The operator could certainly fake it,
but that'd be lying. I'm not making value judgments. It's just what is.
Whether or not the whole ISR thing is good, bad, fraudulent..... I'm not
going there. Hey, I told an aunt of mine I named a backyard tree after
her....
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 14:06:47
From: SkySea
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Perhaps I'm an insensitive type, but it wouldn't hurt me at all to
tell the person who's been misled. I'd feel a pity that I could have
informed them *before* they shelled out the bucks. But that's hardly a
true harm to me, and I'll get over it. Quickly.
As for showing the star at an observatory, well... heck. So it's not
glamorous, so it might give some authenticity to star registry
companies (SRCs). If it's that much of an occurrence, you could post a
general sign pointing out what the official stance of the observatory
on the issue is. That might bring a lawsuit. If that's the case, then
it means the perception of right and wrong is different between the
two parties, and the lawsuit should allow you to bring forth the
points and validate one of them. The packaging/advertising for the
SRCs where they themselves [ethically should] state that it's a
novelty item could be posted up there with the observatory policy.
Granted it's in fine and faded print, but right there at the bottom of
the ISR's home page [ http://www.starregistry.com/ ] it reads,
"International Star Registry star naming is not recognized by the
scientific community. Your star’s name is reserved in International
Star Registry records only." It's a little slimy, sleazy, and
deceptive to hide it that way, but at least this one company admits it
in some fashion.
If the star isn't up, then it's pretty simple to say so. Half the sky
isn't up at any given time, and it's a 50-50 chance they'll just have
to learn that. Or if it's really dim, they'll learn that, too.
If it's hard to find, the operator could admit it. "It's beyond the
technical capabilities of the observatory to locate the object". Note
that you're not claiming the scope can't *see* it, it's just that you
can't *find* it.
Alternatively, you could tell the absolute truth: "We don't want to
give encouragement or credence to star registry comapnies (there are
several) by trying to locate an inconveniently dfficult object to
find. We're sorry that you're a loser and fell for the gag, but we
don't want to imply in any way that we work with or for the SRC, for
instance by actually helping you enjoy your experience with them. We
resent the uncomfortable feelings of guilt laid upon us by SCRs and
our pride as we sanctimoniously punish your gullibility, but hope
you've learned to not be fooled by anyone again (we've never been),
because you're careless and stupid, and we're not. Have a great night,
elsewhere. Bye!"
>"Howard Lester" wrote:
>
>Greg, I wonder if you're missing some of the points made.
>
>So far in this thread I've read that some stars are never visible from the
>star-buyer's location. It would hurt me to have to tell that to the star
>buyer, as I'd expect him or her to be bitterly disappointed. I've also read
>that the charts provided aren't all that good, making it next to impossible
>for the telescope operator to find it. The operator could certainly fake it,
>but that'd be lying. I'm not making value judgments. It's just what is.
>
>Whether or not the whole ISR thing is good, bad, fraudulent..... I'm not
>going there. Hey, I told an aunt of mine I named a backyard tree after
>her....
>
=============
- Dale Gombert (SkySea at aol.com)
122.38W, 47.58N, W. Seattle, WA
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 15:12:18
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
SkySea wrote:
> Alternatively, you could tell the absolute truth: "We don't want to
> give encouragement or credence to star registry comapnies (there are
> several) by trying to locate an inconveniently dfficult object to
> find. We're sorry that you're a loser and fell for the gag, but we
> don't want to imply in any way that we work with or for the SRC, for
> instance by actually helping you enjoy your experience with them. We
> resent the uncomfortable feelings of guilt laid upon us by SCRs and
> our pride as we sanctimoniously punish your gullibility, but hope
> you've learned to not be fooled by anyone again (we've never been),
> because you're careless and stupid, and we're not. Have a great night,
> elsewhere. Bye!"
LOL! Careful where you point that rapier wit!
Greg
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 28 Jul 2007 15:07:55
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Celestron and Int Star Registry
|
Hi Howard,
Howard Lester wrote:
> Greg, I wonder if you're missing some of the points made.
>
> So far in this thread I've read that some stars are never visible from the
> star-buyer's location. It would hurt me to have to tell that to the star
> buyer, as I'd expect him or her to be bitterly disappointed. I've also read
> that the charts provided aren't all that good, making it next to impossible
> for the telescope operator to find it. The operator could certainly fake it,
> but that'd be lying. I'm not making value judgments. It's just what is.
Certainly those are annoyances. What concerns me is that these stars
often represent a fledgling interest in astronomy that we can nourish,
should we only choose to. If we instead choose to be judgmental and
harsh--as I know some amateur astronomers are because I've seen it first
hand--we are in fact driving people away. Who's fault is it then? It
is the attitude of the astronomer or telescope operator that determines
the outcome, not the piece of paper.
I simply smile and laugh and tell people that they have sold so many of
these stars that they use really faint ones that can't be easily seen.
If it never rises then that's a great opportunity to explain about how
parts of the southern sky can't be seen from the northern hemisphere.
If we can't find it with the information provided then I apologize and
explain that the ISR is sometimes in error. Then I suggest looking at
something cool...
Instead, I could get all annoyed and tell them haughtily that they've
been ripped off. What purpose would that serve? Would they ever come
back? If I did that then I think I'd have to re-examine why I do public
events in the first place.
Greg
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://comets.skyhound.com
To reply take out your eye
|
|
