Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

astronomy-chat.net
Promoting astronomy discussion.

Main

Date: 01 Aug 2006 17:42:59
From: Lumpy Darkness
Subject: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

We arrived at Henry Coe State Park to find Peter and Tony in the lot. The sky
had high clouds to the west, over the coastal range and out to the Pacific. It
was shirtsleeve temps. Toward and through sunset we had a wonderful display -
light rays looking like a large crown above a bank of clouds that hid the sun.
This continued through sunset, when reds and golds underlit thinner clouds that
spread across the bay - a really outstanding light show - finishing with a short
deep red solar pillar standing out clearly. Nature is the greatest artist.

There was enough dew early on to wet the seat on my observing chair, but that's
always the first thing to dew up. I heard a comment about a scope being wet,
but I never noticed it on mine. I had my 18" f/4.5 Obsession, as did Richard
set up next to me. As the sky darkened we began doing bright double stars - as
a prelude to a varied observing list I put together. Other observers there
were Peter with his 18" Starmaster, Bob with a 12.5" Portaball, Alan and a Meade
12.5" Lightbridge (is that right?), Tony - who may have had a big dob, and Chris
(who I'm tempted to nickname Houdini after seeing him compress into the back of
a small Audi sports coupe to nap) with a TeleVue NP101.

There were very few visitors. A woman who looked familiar appeared in the
distance from the path to the park headquarters and watched late sunset by the
entry gate, then disappeared again. As dark fell a couple women were looking
through Tony's scope for a while.

First split was of Izar, as the constellations were starting to show. Easy split
with the 12 and 7 Nagler. Didn't take notes on it, but it was such a sharp and
clean split I thought "what's a challenge?"

Once it got dark some yahoos in two vehicles drove into the lot, lights blazing,
until they were shouted at to turn them off - they were out joyriding, not
knowing where they were, and politely left. Peter closed the gate after them.
We had already begun observing.

I pointed the scope south to Antares. In went the 7 Nagler - at 294X there was
a no doubt about it clean split. The companion was in the glare of Antares, but
watching carefully easily showed "The Green Pea". Antares color was great - a
brilliant yellow-orange.

I could hear others mentioning the outstanding seeing.... and this bode well,
as my list had several good doubles.

The list ran from highest to lowest declination, and began with the double Beta
Cephei (8 Ceph, mag 3.23 at RA: 21h 28m 39.60s Dec: +70°33'38.5"). This was an
easy split at low power (20 Nagler = 103X).

We moved to the middle of the box of Cepheus to Xi (17 Ceph, mag 4.26 at RA: 22h
03m 47.45s Dec: +64°37'40.7"). Similar PA as Beta Ceph - closer - brighter is
yellow/white, dimmer gold.

Next was the nice same field pair, NGC 6939 (mag 7.8 at RA: 20h 31m 24s Dec:
+60°38") and NGC 6946 (mag 8.9 at RA: 20h 31m 24s Dec: +60°38'). While there
was more detail in the bigger scopes, the nicest view may have been in Chris'
NP101, where both objects were framed nicely in the wide field. I observed them
with the 20 Nagler. 6939 is a a nice large open, many stars with 3 chains
hanging off the S to SSW, tight knot of stars to the east of center. 6946 is
large, as big as open, has a brightened tight core, arms curling
counterclockwise - the arms are to E and W. This galaxy is current the record
holder for most supernovae.

It was a short hop to Mu Cephei. Known as Herschel's Garnet Star (mag 4.23 at
RA: 21h 43m 30.46s Dec: +58°46'48") - Very deep orange - highlight red star
compared to others I'd observe during the night. The description "ruddy" orange
applies.

W Cygni is a nice red star at nearly mag 6 (RA: 21h 36m 02.50s Dec:
+45°22'28.53"), located very close to mag 5 Rho Cygni. W is coppery or dried
blood red.

61 Cygni (mags 5.2 and 6.0, RA: 21h 06m 53.9s Dec: +38°44'57.9") is a famous
double with nice cream and gold colors. This double has a large proper motion,
which drew attention to it early on, and it became the second star after the sun
to have its distance measured (via parallax).

We had periods of clouds coming through. At one point, looking toward
Sagittarius and along the Milky Way, a cloud band seemed to merge with it, along
its length, and it was difficult to tell the earthly clouds from the band of the
galaxy.

M29 was the next target. This is to me the least impressive of the Messier
catalog, aside from the double star and asterism. Easy to locate (mag 6.6 at
RA: 20h 23m 54s Dec: +38°32') near Gamma Cygni, this open cluster is a pair of
chains in slight arcs bowing away from each other running generally E/W. There
are many dim components in between - Northern arc (each arc is 3 stars) has two
more stars off NW end.

Lamda Cygni (54 Cygni at RA: 20h 47m 24.54s Dec: +36°29'26.58") is a tight
double, with a 0.9' separation - a very tight split. Used a 2x barlow and 7mm
for 588X, giving a clean split. Bright component mag 4.8 to the north, dimmer
mag 6.1 is southern star. This double is very easy to find with the unaided eye.
Interesting that The Sky does not show it as a double.

We knew the seeing was good, but going after a galaxy trio off Miles Paul's list
would test the transparency. NGC 7273, NGC 7274 and NGC 7276 are in Lacerta
just east of 1 Lacertae. NGC 7274 (RA: 22h 24m 11s Dec: +36°07'32") was the
brightest at mag 13.3. Three galaxies in a line running n/s, southern two closer
together but not much - middle is brightest, two others about equal mag. S one
is very close to a dim star. Middle has bright core.

V 460 Cygni is on the red star list. I found it unimpressive, but it has color
- lightly tinted - more yellow than red. Its a little tougher to find, but
helped that it is one of three naked eye stars in a slight arc ranging from mag
6 to 6.5.

Next we viewed the Veil Nebula and its finder/double star 52 Cygni. The Veil was
showing very well - the NGC 6960 western section at 171X using a 12 Nagler and
OIII filter was outstanding - the thin section looking like a glowing tube - or
like a high power microscopic view of cilia on plankton. 52 Cygni is a close
double with wide mag difference. Bright yellow and dim green. Dimmer is to
EENE of primary. Nice color contrast. The NGC 6979 section of the Veil was
very billowy compared to Witch's Broom side, long, outstanding detail in
Waterfall area, which is brighter - down toward other end as it gradually dims.

NGC 6934 is a good globular off the tail of Delphinus (mag 8.9, RA: 20h 34m 12s
Dec: +07°24'). Very nice at 294X. 3 density zones with a bright core overlayed
by many of the brightest stars in the cluster. Seems elongated NS but also seems
to have spikes to E and W.

Mu Cygni (78 Cygni, mag 4.5 and 4.8, RA: 21h 44m 08.59s Dec: +28°44'33.48").
Good clean split at 294X, sitting NW/SE with brighter to SE. Brighter is
yellow/white and dimmer gold yellow. Easy location on border with Pegasus.

Back toward the Veil, but in Vulpecula, is open cluster NGC 6940 (mag 6.3 at RA:
20h 34m 36.s Dec: +28°18') is a treat. Large filling the field of both 20
Nagler and pretty much in 35 Panoptic. Many bright members throughout - a
greatly overlooked cluster - better than many Messier opens - nice red star in
denser southern half. Easy location.

It was now past 2 a.m. and the sky was dark. Fog lay in all the valleys and the
light dome over San Jose was muting down. A few observers had left, I think one
was sleeping in his truck, and four of us remained at our telescopes. This was
probably the best observing of the night, aside from the great steadiness we
enjoyed earlier. Now the breeze picked up a bit, making us work harder on tight
doubles But the increased dark was what we needed for some of the dim galaxies
we'd go after.... I hadn't observed like this at Coe in about two years,
energized, engrossed.

Gamma Delphinus is the nose of the dolphin.... a very easy target. Its a clean
split at 103X with yellow white primary E of yellow green slightly dimmer
companion. Nice double.

South of Gamma is the galaxy trio NGC 6956, UGC 11620 and UGC 11623. The NGC is
the brightest (mag 14 at RA: 20h 44m 0s Dec: +12°31'). In almost an
equilateral triangle. Brightest is round with two dimmer ones both elongated
NE/SW. Dimmer galaxies stood out with 12 Nagler, difficult in the 20 Nagler.

Moving off the tail of the dolphin, back toward the globular, is the galaxy trio
of NGC 6927, NGC 6928 and NGC 6930. This is from the Miles Paul Atlas, which
mistakenly has NGC 6929 instead of NGC 6930. The brightest is NGC 6928 (mag
13.5, RA: 20h 32m 51.0s Dec: +09°55'49"). All three are elongated - nice view
- 6928 brightest and at E/W cant, 6930 also obvious, 6927 difficult but can be
held averted - two dimmer at N/S elongation.

We also viewed six galaxies in one tight field in Aquarius. NGC 6962 is the
brightest (mag 12, RA: 20h 47m 18s Dec: +00°19'). I used the 7 Nagler at 293X
to bring out the dimmer components. NGC 6963 is the challenge in the group at
mag 14.7. Peter had a very nice view of this group.

It was now late, after 3 a.m. We looked at Zeta Aquarii - a tight double star
with almost identical colors and magnitude (mags 3.3 and 3.4, RA: 22h 28m 49.9s
Dec: -00°01'11.9"). It is the center of the "Mercedes Symbol" in Aquarius.
White yellow / green yellow NW/SE nice clean split and beautiful with 7 Nagler.

Our last object of the night was Hickson 88 in Aquarius - NGC 6975, NGC 6976,
NGC 6977 and NGC 6978. NGC 6978 is the brightest (mag 13.3 at RA: 20h 52m 36.s
Dec: -05°43'). NGC 6975, 76 and 77 In a line. 6978 brightest, 77 slightly
larger, 76 further away and dimmest. Did not find nearby NGC 6975.

I got into my truck, onto a tri-fold futon for the night. I've ended many great
nights at Coe this way.

In the morning, the fog was still low over the valleys. To the east fog was
higher, lapping at the ridges dividing us from the Central Valley. I packed up
and headed down the mountain. Nearing the freeway I found myself looking in the
rear view mirror, reflecting back to the night, and smiled.

Mirrors can sure show us a lot!

--
- - - Lumpy Darkness - - -

Date: 01 Aug 2006 20:01:50
From:
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

I enjoyed that, Lumpy. I have an 8" sct and I stopped going to Coe
because several years ago the site was "discovered" as an alternate to
Fremont Peak, which apparently became unfriendly to telescope users way
back then. After I read that on the local message boards I never went
back. The last time I drove up there from Morgan Hill there were only
two people all night and it was a peaceful place. One person had a
motorized noisy telescope and the other person I talked to had a
reflector scope from Orion. I remember that night well. That day
displayed a really peculiar sunset over the distant Santa Cruz
Mountains.

I enjoyed reading your observing report for that evening.

Date: 02 Aug 2006 15:42:32
From: Lumpy Darkness
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

On 1 Aug 2006 20:01:50 -0700, solodon@hotmail.com wrote:

>I have an 8" sct and I stopped going to Coe because several years ago the site was "discovered" as an alternate to Fremont Peak, which apparently became unfriendly to telescope users way
>back then.

Yes, that was several years ago. The Peak has a group of observers that put up
with the (unnecessarily) stingent rules. There's a group that goes to Coe,
others that go to Montebello Open Space Preserve, some who go to Coyote Lake
County Park. The old group from Fremont Peak spread out.

>The last time I drove up there from Morgan Hill there were only two people all night and it was a peaceful place.

It still is peaceful.

> One person had a motorized noisy telescope

The only noisy scope last weekend was Peter's 18". We call it the Singin
Starmaster... whenever it slews, it sounds musical. But it is not a bother like
the coffee-grinder sounds the Meade LX-200's used to make!

>I enjoyed reading your observing report for that evening.

Thanks. It was a surprisngly good night!

---
Lumpy Darkness

Date: 05 Aug 2006 15:53:58
From: Shneor
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Nice report. I observed at Coe once, about 8 or 9 years ago, in March,
after a particularly useless winter in the foothills. But the glare
from San Jose just allowed viweing to the north - I recall observing a
multitude of galaxies in Ursa Major - but most of the sky was unusable
because of the San Jose light.

Clears,
Shneor

Date: 08 Aug 2006 15:53:21
From: Lumpy Darkness
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

On 5 Aug 2006 15:53:58 -0700, "Shneor" <shneor@my-deja.com > wrote:

>Nice report. I observed at Coe once, about 8 or 9 years ago, in March,
>after a particularly useless winter in the foothills. But the glare
>from San Jose just allowed viweing to the north

That must have been a very odd night, as San Jose is generally to the northwest
from Coe, and there is minimal light intrusion from the southeast and east.
Other lesser light sources are Morgan Hill and Gilroy to the west and southwest.
However, when the marine layer pshes in from the ocean, and blankets the
valleys, and San Jose (Santa Clara Valley), Coe can be as dark any good
observing site. Although you will get disagreement on this, it is the equal of
Fremont Peak. And, for those of us stuck in the south San Francisco bay area,
Coe is the closest "dark" site we have. FYI, I've observed the Herschel catalog
primarily from there, so it can't be that bad very often, you just got a bad
night, and one in which the glare apparently changed direction! ;-)

Date: 08 Aug 2006 11:21:12
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Hi,

That's a very nice observing report. But to tell you the truth it sort
of left me cold because I don't know who you are. Why not sign your
real name? You know exactly who I am... doesn't seem fair.

I feel that the use of aliases on SAA has led to a loss of community
here (what little there was buried in the noise in the first place).
Anybody else agree? If so, please consider signing your posts with a
real name.

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://www.skyhound.com/sh/comets.html

To reply take out your eye

Date: 08 Aug 2006 14:33:56
From: Willie R. Meghar
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Greg Crinklaw wrote:

>I feel that the use of aliases on SAA has led to a loss of community
>here (what little there was buried in the noise in the first place).
>Anybody else agree? If so, please consider signing your posts with a
>real name.

I disagree!

From what I've noticed the two most outspoken exponents for posting
with a real name (and against posting with an alias) include in their
signature either a book or software from which they stand to make
financial gain. Furthermore, one or the other of these individuals
will occasionally respond to known trolls and/or off-topic postings
for no apparent reason (unless it's to further propagate the
advertisements contained within their signatures).

If you're not selling something or looking for handouts there's little
reason to provide a true identity or personal contact information with
your postings. The argument that one can tell the worth of a posting
by whether or not an alias is used is totally bogus.

A person's real name, by itself, has no greater significance than a
made up alias. It's only when that name is used to search for a
physical address, phone number or other personal information that it
gains a greater significance.

These occasional postings advocating the use of real names may (or may
not) in reality be efforts to gain names with which to do searches for
more critical personal information. It raises an even larger red flag
when the request comes from someone with something to sell.

Willie R. Meghar

Date: 08 Aug 2006 16:20:37
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Willie R. Meghar wrote:

A typical stupid senseless boring and childish troll by someone using an
alias who clearly has absolutely no real life whatsoever...

Thanks for making my point (even if it was done ironically).

--
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://www.skyhound.com/sh/comets.html

To reply take out your eye

Date: 08 Aug 2006 14:44:13
From: Brian Tung
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Willie R. Meghar wrote:
> From what I've noticed the two most outspoken exponents for posting
> with a real name (and against posting with an alias) include in their
> signature either a book or software from which they stand to make
> financial gain. Furthermore, one or the other of these individuals
> will occasionally respond to known trolls and/or off-topic postings
> for no apparent reason (unless it's to further propagate the
> advertisements contained within their signatures).
>
> If you're not selling something or looking for handouts there's little
> reason to provide a true identity or personal contact information with
> your postings. The argument that one can tell the worth of a posting
> by whether or not an alias is used is totally bogus.
>
> A person's real name, by itself, has no greater significance than a
> made up alias. It's only when that name is used to search for a
> physical address, phone number or other personal information that it
> gains a greater significance.
>
> These occasional postings advocating the use of real names may (or may
> not) in reality be efforts to gain names with which to do searches for
> more critical personal information. It raises an even larger red flag
> when the request comes from someone with something to sell.

I think you're being a bit hard on Greg. He does sell a product, but as
far as I can tell, he doesn't come here to sell it. And I certainly do
not think he's harvesting names! He's been here for several years, and
if he were harvesting names, I think we'd all have heard about it by
now.

There is value in seeing a real name, but I don't think it's the fact
that's the real name; it's the fact that it's permanent. I have no real
clue as to whether any of the folks that go by the names Rod Mollise,
Greg Crinklaw, Stephen Paul, or whoever--whether those are really their
names. It doesn't matter, as far as SAA is concerned. What I do know
is that I know what to expect out of the posts their names are attached
to. That, in my opinion, is the value of using a real name. One could
do the same thing with a pseudonym like Lumpy Darkness, who I know has
been posting to SAA, off and on, for a long time indeed. I know what
kind of posts he produces (and for the record, I like them), and that's
what matters here.

I seem to recall that you're using a pseudonym yourself, and that might
be why you take umbrage at Greg's rationale for his request, but I also
read your posts, because I know that posts with the "Willie Meghar"
stamp are generally full of useful content. :)

So, although I disagree with Greg on a matter of principle--that it's
the reality of names that make a post meaningful, rather than their
constancy--I will be an equal-opportunity disagreer <g > and say that I
can't believe Greg has a nefarious purpose in mind in pushing for the
use of real names. It simply does not accord with what I know of him
from his posts.

--
Brian Tung <brian@isi.edu >
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.html

Date: 08 Aug 2006 20:14:47
From: Willie R. Meghar
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

(Brian Tung) wrote:

>I think you're being a bit hard on Greg. He does sell a product, but as
>far as I can tell, he doesn't come here to sell it. And I certainly do
>not think he's harvesting names! He's been here for several years, and
>if he were harvesting names, I think we'd all have heard about it by
>now.

Yes, I was a bit hard on Greg. I have serious doubts that Greg or
anyone else on saa harvests names with evil intent.

Greg chose to put into doubt the credibility of those who use aliases;
and he chose to single such individuals out as being responsible for
(some of) saa's problems. The objective in my posting was to turn the
table around 180 degrees. I wanted to demonstrate to Greg what it's
like to be on the receiving end of an unfair and inaccurate
generalization. You will notice that nowhere did I come out and state
that Greg actually made nefarious use of real names. I simply planted
a seed of doubt -- in much the same way that Greg did against those
who use aliases. This was done in the hope that Greg (and anyone who
agrees with him) will realize the unfairness and harm inherent in
negative generalizations.

Willie R. Meghar

Date: 08 Aug 2006 23:03:40
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Willie R. Meghar wrote:
> (Brian Tung) wrote:
>
>> I think you're being a bit hard on Greg. He does sell a product, but as
>> far as I can tell, he doesn't come here to sell it. And I certainly do
>> not think he's harvesting names! He's been here for several years, and
>> if he were harvesting names, I think we'd all have heard about it by
>> now.
>
> Yes, I was a bit hard on Greg. I have serious doubts that Greg or
> anyone else on saa harvests names with evil intent.
>
> Greg chose to put into doubt the credibility of those who use aliases;
> and he chose to single such individuals out as being responsible for
> (some of) saa's problems. The objective in my posting was to turn the
> table around 180 degrees. I wanted to demonstrate to Greg what it's
> like to be on the receiving end of an unfair and inaccurate
> generalization. You will notice that nowhere did I come out and state
> that Greg actually made nefarious use of real names. I simply planted
> a seed of doubt -- in much the same way that Greg did against those
> who use aliases. This was done in the hope that Greg (and anyone who
> agrees with him) will realize the unfairness and harm inherent in
> negative generalizations.

Cute, but not a very friendly or reasonable way to express yourself.

My suggestion that people use real names stands as do my reasons for
suggesting it.

A "Negative generalization" was hardly my point. That's rather like
claiming a "negative generalization" about all who drink if I suggest
people not drink and drive. In other words, it is you who in fact made
generalizations about my remarks, turning them into some sort of
perceived insult when they were not.

--
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://www.skyhound.com/sh/comets.html

To reply take out your eye

Date: 08 Aug 2006 16:57:56
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Brian Tung wrote:
> There is value in seeing a real name, but I don't think it's the fact
> that's the real name; it's the fact that it's permanent. I have no real
> clue as to whether any of the folks that go by the names Rod Mollise,
> Greg Crinklaw, Stephen Paul, or whoever--whether those are really their
> names. It doesn't matter, as far as SAA is concerned. What I do know
> is that I know what to expect out of the posts their names are attached
> to. That, in my opinion, is the value of using a real name. One could
> do the same thing with a pseudonym like Lumpy Darkness, who I know has
> been posting to SAA, off and on, for a long time indeed. I know what
> kind of posts he produces (and for the record, I like them), and that's
> what matters here.

Brian, I disagree. As I see it the primary reason there is so much
juvenile posting on newsgroups (including trolling) is due to the lack
of accountability. Using a real name means that the poster is laying
his/her real life credibility on the line every time he/she posts. And
while that may not mean that everyone would behave themselves, I do
believe that if posters used their real names more there would be less
childish antics.

As I've said here before, I stand behind my stupid statements 100%. Why
should others get away with being able to say anything they want, no
matter how hurtful, obnoxious, or stupid, because they are hiding behind
an alias?

Consider the post you just responded to. It was absolutely outrageous.
In fact, it could be considered libelous. But we have no idea who
made these ridiculous accusations or why. Was he serious? Pulling my
leg? Trolling? There is no way to know. So why give this person any
respect at all? As you see from my response, I chose not to. As far as
I'm concerned anyone who uses an alias to post here is someone with very
little credibility.

Would I respect Rod Mollise as much if he posted under the pseudonym
"SouthernComfort?" My personal answer is no. I'd still respect him,
because, heck, he's Rod, but not quite as much...

Consider as well that the names you mentioned as regular posters here
are very likely real. Unlike you, I have no doubt about that. And add
yourself to that list as well as others such as Chris Peterson.

I also think it works the other way around. I know I'm personally far
more likely to be rude to someone hiding behind an alias that someone
using their real name. It's just plain easier to rip "dumbasstargazer"
a new one. ;-)

The only exception I can think of is Starlord. He uses an alias but
does not hide behind it. We all know him, alias or not. But that's one
exception to what seems to me a pretty hard and fast rule.

It's been said that people say hurtful outrageous things on newsgroups
that they would never say face to face. I believe that's true. And I
also believe that signing your real name is a step away from that
unfortunate and ugly reality.

So once again I'll make a plea for real names and suggest that at least
for some of us, it is very difficult to earn respect using an alias.

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://www.skyhound.com/sh/comets.html

To reply take out your eye

Date: 08 Aug 2006 16:32:59
From: Brian Tung
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Greg Crinklaw wrote:
> Brian, I disagree. As I see it the primary reason there is so much
> juvenile posting on newsgroups (including trolling) is due to the lack
> of accountability. Using a real name means that the poster is laying
> his/her real life credibility on the line every time he/she posts. And
> while that may not mean that everyone would behave themselves, I do
> believe that if posters used their real names more there would be less
> childish antics.
>
> As I've said here before, I stand behind my stupid statements 100%. Why
> should others get away with being able to say anything they want, no
> matter how hurtful, obnoxious, or stupid, because they are hiding behind
> an alias?
>
> Consider the post you just responded to. It was absolutely outrageous.
> In fact, it could be considered libelous. But we have no idea who
> made these ridiculous accusations or why. Was he serious? Pulling my
> leg? Trolling? There is no way to know. So why give this person any
> respect at all? As you see from my response, I chose not to. As far as
> I'm concerned anyone who uses an alias to post here is someone with very
> little credibility.
>
> Would I respect Rod Mollise as much if he posted under the pseudonym
> "SouthernComfort?" My personal answer is no. I'd still respect him,
> because, heck, he's Rod, but not quite as much...
>
> Consider as well that the names you mentioned as regular posters here
> are very likely real. Unlike you, I have no doubt about that. And add
> yourself to that list as well as others such as Chris Peterson.
>
> I also think it works the other way around. I know I'm personally far
> more likely to be rude to someone hiding behind an alias that someone
> using their real name. It's just plain easier to rip "dumbasstargazer"
> a new one. ;-)
>
> The only exception I can think of is Starlord. He uses an alias but
> does not hide behind it. We all know him, alias or not. But that's one
> exception to what seems to me a pretty hard and fast rule.
>
> It's been said that people say hurtful outrageous things on newsgroups
> that they would never say face to face. I believe that's true. And I
> also believe that signing your real name is a step away from that
> unfortunate and ugly reality.
>
> So once again I'll make a plea for real names and suggest that at least
> for some of us, it is very difficult to earn respect using an alias.

We may just have to agree to disagree, I suppose. I acknowledge that
I'm making a pretty subtle point--one that practically speaking does not
make a *lot* of difference, on Usenet at least. But I think it does
make *some* difference.

With respect to Willie's post, I've seen him post, recently, lots of
good on-topic material, which was why I was surprised by the one that
started this thread. So I guess that's my point: Understandably, you're
pretty hurt by that characterization. But unless you've been paying
close attention, you might not have noticed that he had been using a
pseudonym. So the question is, are you more bothered by the hurtful
nature of the posting, or by the fact that he posted under a pseudonym?
As the target of that post, you might feel differently, but it seems to
me that for most people, it would be the former that would be the
problem.

I also think that Starlord is a meaningful exception, and not just one
that proves the rule, as the old saying goes. He is an exception
precisely *because* he posts consistently. I think if other folks
tried to forge a posting from him, without having read his posts here on
SAA over the years, they would probably fail; we'd spot them a mile
away. We've come to know what general kind of posts to expect from him.

All that being said, I do agree that people are somewhat less likely to
act unreasonably when they sign their real name to a post, but I think
it is not a requirement to do so. Suppose my name were in fact
something different (that isn't actually true, except for the fact that
"Brian" is a nickname I use everywhere, simply for convenience), and
suppose I were to divulge that suddenly. I don't think that would
invalidate the Usenet persona of "Brian Tung" that has accumulated over
a period of more than a decade. It's possible that some folks might
think less of me as a result, but personally, I think that would say
less about me than it would about them--not negative, necessarily, but
not someone I would want to know well.

All this by way of saying that accountability is not required to confer
a sense of responsibility (nor does it always do so), and if I have to
choose between the two, I choose the latter.

--
Brian (Yeh-Ching) Tung <brian@isi.edu >
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.html

Date: 08 Aug 2006 18:01:16
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Brian Tung wrote:
> Greg Crinklaw wrote:
> With respect to Willie's post, I've seen him post, recently, lots of
> good on-topic material, which was why I was surprised by the one that
> started this thread. So I guess that's my point: Understandably, you're
> pretty hurt by that characterization. But unless you've been paying
> close attention, you might not have noticed that he had been using a
> pseudonym. So the question is, are you more bothered by the hurtful
> nature of the posting, or by the fact that he posted under a pseudonym?
> As the target of that post, you might feel differently, but it seems to
> me that for most people, it would be the former that would be the
> problem.

I am not at all "hurt" by his post. I would describe my feeling more as
disappointment. Disappointment that someone would post something like
that, either because they are hurtful, stupid, or mistakenly think they
are funny (take your pick). Regardless such a response deserves little
respect and since this person hides behind a pseudonym in what I feel is
a cowardly manner it just makes it all that much easier to place his
pseudonym in the old kill file.

As an aside, if I could sum up how I feel about SAA, "disappointment"
would fit pretty well. I am constantly disappointed in the way people
behave here (and sometimes disappointed in myself.)

> I also think that Starlord is a meaningful exception, and not just one
> that proves the rule, as the old saying goes. He is an exception
> precisely *because* he posts consistently. I think if other folks
> tried to forge a posting from him, without having read his posts here on
> SAA over the years, they would probably fail; we'd spot them a mile
> away. We've come to know what general kind of posts to expect from him.

I think it's more what I said--that he doesn't hide. Hiding is the key
(at least for me). Starlord hides nothing (and has even posted his real
name on occasion). So as far as I'm concerned, when it comes to what
counts (what I call hiding) Starlord may not be an exception at all.
The thing is, it's more difficult to "hide" using your real name.

> All that being said, I do agree that people are somewhat less likely to
> act unreasonably when they sign their real name to a post, but I think
> it is not a requirement to do so. Suppose my name were in fact
> something different (that isn't actually true, except for the fact that
> "Brian" is a nickname I use everywhere, simply for convenience), and
> suppose I were to divulge that suddenly. I don't think that would
> invalidate the Usenet persona of "Brian Tung" that has accumulated over
> a period of more than a decade. It's possible that some folks might
> think less of me as a result, but personally, I think that would say
> less about me than it would about them--not negative, necessarily, but
> not someone I would want to know well.

The way I look at it is this: you don't use a pseudonym because you are
here on SAA for serious respectful discussion. The two are indeed
linked, if not directly. Let's face it, the majority of people who are
not here for serious respectful discussion use pseudonyms...

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://www.skyhound.com/sh/comets.html

To reply take out your eye

Date: 08 Aug 2006 22:21:27
From: Harald Lang
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Brian Tung wrote

>There is value in seeing a real name, but I don't think it's the fact
>that's the real name; it's the fact that it's permanent. I have no real
>clue as to whether any of the folks that go by the names Rod Mollise,
>Greg Crinklaw, Stephen Paul, or whoever--whether those are really their
>names. It doesn't matter, as far as SAA is concerned. What I do know
>is that I know what to expect out of the posts their names are attached
>to. That, in my opinion, is the value of using a real name. One could
>do the same thing with a pseudonym like Lumpy Darkness, who I know has
>been posting to SAA, off and on, for a long time indeed. I know what
>kind of posts he produces (and for the record, I like them), and that's
>what matters here.

However, "Lumpy" used to write here under his real name, then he
started use this pseudonym, so it isn't really "permanent".

Cheers -- Harald

Date: 08 Aug 2006 15:37:04
From: Brian Tung
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Harald Lang wrote:
> However, "Lumpy" used to write here under his real name, then he
> started use this pseudonym, so it isn't really "permanent".

It's permanent enough to mentally attach a posting profile to, though.

> Cheers -- Harald

Speaking of permanent, Harald: How are you? Didn't know you were
lurking about. Should I post something geometrical to induce you to
start posting again? :)

--
Brian Tung <brian@isi.edu >
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.html

Date: 09 Aug 2006 17:13:37
From: Paul Schlyter
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

In article <e6thd25ab6v030v1j6dc3o1jru804b7ekv@4ax.com >,
Willie R. Meghar <NoMail@thisaddress.net > wrote:
> Greg Crinklaw wrote:
>
>> I feel that the use of aliases on SAA has led to a loss of community
>> here (what little there was buried in the noise in the first place).
>> Anybody else agree? If so, please consider signing your posts with a
>> real name.
>
> I disagree!
>
> From what I've noticed the two most outspoken exponents for posting
> with a real name (and against posting with an alias) include in their
> signature either a book or software from which they stand to make
> financial gain. Furthermore, one or the other of these individuals
> will occasionally respond to known trolls and/or off-topic postings
> for no apparent reason (unless it's to further propagate the
> advertisements contained within their signatures).
>
> If you're not selling something or looking for handouts there's little
> reason to provide a true identity or personal contact information with
> your postings. The argument that one can tell the worth of a posting
> by whether or not an alias is used is totally bogus.
>
> A person's real name, by itself, has no greater significance than a
> made up alias. It's only when that name is used to search for a
> physical address, phone number or other personal information that it
> gains a greater significance.
>
> These occasional postings advocating the use of real names may (or may
> not) in reality be efforts to gain names with which to do searches for
> more critical personal information. It raises an even larger red flag
> when the request comes from someone with something to sell.
>
> Willie R. Meghar

In the good ol' days, some 12+ years ago, before there was spam mail/etc,
posting under your real name was taken for granted. Those few who hid
behind an alias was usually frowned upon. There were even some public
lists of email addresses, to make it easier for people to get in touch
with one another.

Today, spam flood your mailbox unless you take precautions -
revealing your mail address in a public forum is usually considered
unwise. Ads for this or that pop up almost everywhere on the Net.
And people hide behind aliases partially to protect themselves from
that, but also to be able to post anything and afterwards escape
responsibility for their posts.

Something was indeed lost when the Net was made easily available to
the general public.

And don't you agree that there is indeed a loss of community when
people you talk to refuse to reveal their identity, because they're
afraid of what you might do to them if you know who they are?

--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Paul Schlyter, Grev Turegatan 40, SE-114 38 Stockholm, SWEDEN
e-mail: pausch at stockholm dot bostream dot se
WWW: http://stjarnhimlen.se/

Date: 09 Aug 2006 08:23:08
From: John Steinberg
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Greg Crinklaw wrote:

> That's a very nice observing report.

I disagree. It was an excellent report.

> But to tell you the truth it sort of left me cold because I don't
> know who you are.

Presumably you also had similar *feelings* when you read anything by
Lewis Carroll, Joseph Conrad, Mark Twain, Gore Vidal or Oscar Wilde?

> I feel that the use of aliases on SAA has led to a loss of community
> here (what little there was buried in the noise in the first place).

Yes, most of us already know all about your *feelings*, Greg. Here's a
great big *hug* for you. Feel better now?

Noted: You took an excellent observing report and used it as a soapbox
for one of your many Usenet pet peeves.

At the risk of reminding you of the painfully obvious, Usenet is not
your Yahoo! group, sparky. You want to play netcop, Officer Greg, do so
on your own turf.

The unmitigated gall of you to take a fine report and use it as a
launching pad for one of your seemingly endless Usenet whines. Gawd,
you are a tedious and trifling whiner.

Isn't this around the point where you pick up your toys and leave
Usenet for good -- for the umpteenth time? Oh, that's right, you
killfiled me eons ago, and suggested others follow suit.

Excellent job, Lumpy. Ignore the background noises.

--
-John Steinberg

Date: 09 Aug 2006 16:28:11
From: Lumpy Darkness
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 08:23:08 -0400, John Steinberg <seesig@bottom.invalid >
wrote:

>Presumably you also had similar *feelings* when you read anything by
>Lewis Carroll, Joseph Conrad, Mark Twain, Gore Vidal or Oscar Wilde?

LOL.... John... ya shudda been a surgeon.

Nice to be back on SAA, in all its wonderful weirdness.

---
Lumpy Darkness

Date: 09 Aug 2006 11:09:00
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Lumpy Darkness wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 08:23:08 -0400, John Steinberg <seesig@bottom.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> Presumably you also had similar *feelings* when you read anything by
>> Lewis Carroll, Joseph Conrad, Mark Twain, Gore Vidal or Oscar Wilde?
>
> LOL.... John... ya shudda been a surgeon.

For the record, I never even tried to be in a community with any of
those people. This is, after all, a community isn't it?

How can you be nice to someone who is so mean? I don't get it. The
rest of what he said was out of line, pure and simple.

I was simply trying to make this a better place. I did so respectfully
and with no ill intent. And for that I get dumped on? What a bunch of
jerks here. How do you guys sleep at night?

--
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://www.skyhound.com/sh/comets.html

To reply take out your eye

Date: 09 Aug 2006 18:24:08
From: Lumpy Darkness
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:09:00 -0600, Greg Crinklaw <theskyhoundyoureye@yahoo.com >
wrote:

>How can you be nice to someone who is so mean? I don't get it. The
>rest of what he said was out of line, pure and simple.

All I saw was him saying you're out of line, and that you've quit SAA a huge
number of times. That's mean? And I wasn't addressing the rest of what he said
in my reply, but only agreeing with him pointing out that pseudonyms are not
uncommon. If you have some discomfort with that, e-mail me privately and I have
no problem giving my real name.

>I was simply trying to make this a better place.

Better according to who? By telling people they shouldn't use pseudonums
because *you* don't like it? Have you been harmed?

> What a bunch of jerks here.

Name calling does not help.

Date: 09 Aug 2006 14:11:35
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Lumpy Darkness wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:09:00 -0600, Greg Crinklaw <theskyhoundyoureye@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
>> How can you be nice to someone who is so mean? I don't get it. The
>> rest of what he said was out of line, pure and simple.
>
> All I saw was him saying you're out of line, and that you've quit SAA a huge
> number of times. That's mean? And I wasn't addressing the rest of what he said
> in my reply, but only agreeing with him pointing out that pseudonyms are not
> uncommon. If you have some discomfort with that, e-mail me privately and I have
> no problem giving my real name.

Really? As an aid to your reading comprehension I suggest reading my
original post and his response again and checking the appropriate boxes
below:

[ ] Respectful
[ ] Friendly
[ ] Kind

[ ] Vindictive
[ ] Contains attacks of a personal nature

>> I was simply trying to make this a better place.
>
> Better according to who? By telling people they shouldn't use pseudonums
> because *you* don't like it? Have you been harmed?

Telling? Can't anyone here read? All I said was:

"I feel that the use of aliases on SAA has led to a loss of community
here (what little there was buried in the noise in the first place).
Anybody else agree? If so, please consider signing your posts with a
real name."

Man, what an asshole I am for saying that!

Or is it the other way 'round?

>> What a bunch of jerks here.
>
> Name calling does not help.

Hey, if the name fits... I have nothing to be ashamed of except for
being in company with this bunch of losers. I can fix that.

If I'm going to be hounded and attacked for making polite suggestions
then why should I even want to be a member of this harsh, obnoxious,
broken "community" of losers? Why would anyone want to be? I am not
here simply so people like Steinberg and "Meghar" can pick on me
endlessly! Jesus H. Christ!

If you want, I'll be happy to suggest some pseudonyms that might be more
appropriate for the lot of you. :-)

--
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://www.skyhound.com/sh/comets.html

To reply take out your eye

Date: 09 Aug 2006 17:09:41
From: John Steinberg
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Greg Crinklaw <theskyhoundyoureye@yahoo.com > wrote:

> "I feel that the use of aliases on SAA has led to a loss of community
> here

This is not a community, it's Usenet. It's an open, unmoderated and
global forum. At the root of it all is the desire to share an learn
about the primary topic. Sure, civility is nice. Perhaps when you
come back again you'll own up to your errors in basic decorum and get
along swimmingly.

> Man, what an asshole I am for saying that!

While your candor is appreciated, you nevertheless conveniently left
out this gem:

> But to tell you the truth it sort of left me cold because I don't
> know who you are.

The narrative stands on its own. It does not require your stamp of
approval, or need to adhere to any artificial guidelines you may wish
to impose.

News flash: If you have nothing nice to say, say nothing. This is
grade school behavior on your part. Truly puerile.

> Hey, if the name fits... I have nothing to be ashamed of except for
> being in company with this bunch of losers. I can fix that.

You have plenty to be ashamed of, not the least of which is your
wreckless flaming away here.

> If I'm going to be hounded and attacked for making polite suggestions
> then why should I even want to be a member of this harsh, obnoxious,
> broken "community" of losers?

Don't let the door hit you on the way out, again, Greg.

You'll be back. It's one of those venues you can shamelessly hawk
your shitty software without cost. Yes, I'm sure we "losers" will all
queue up to order your software now. Imagine the level of customer
service!

And to clarify, by shitty I refer only to the fact that I consider you
a royal shithead and thus anything you produce, ergo, must be shitty.

> Why would anyone want to be? I am not
> here simply so people like Steinberg and "Meghar" can pick on me
> endlessly! Jesus H. Christ!

And once more your persecution complex comes to the fore.

> If you want, I'll be happy to suggest some pseudonyms that might be more
> appropriate for the lot of you. :-)

Painting with that broad brush again. Not all that clever for a guy
who is writing before a relatively large audience of his potential
buyers.

Come back when you're prepared to behave like an adult and accept
legitimate criticism without having a childish temper tantrum.

--
-John Steinberg
email: not@thistime.invalid

Date: 09 Aug 2006 08:15:40
From:
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

I just came across this post by accident using Google. No wonder you
are in my lill file, John. Not only do you post off topic politics and
computer-religion you are also contemptuous, hateful and unforgiving.
I'll let the other readers decide if I said anything that would deserve
your bitter hateful response and then they can decide if you belong in
their own kill files.

Greg

John Steinberg wrote:
> Greg Crinklaw wrote:
>
> > That's a very nice observing report.
>
> I disagree. It was an excellent report.
>
> > But to tell you the truth it sort of left me cold because I don't
> > know who you are.
>
> Presumably you also had similar *feelings* when you read anything by
> Lewis Carroll, Joseph Conrad, Mark Twain, Gore Vidal or Oscar Wilde?
>
> > I feel that the use of aliases on SAA has led to a loss of community
> > here (what little there was buried in the noise in the first place).
>
> Yes, most of us already know all about your *feelings*, Greg. Here's a
> great big *hug* for you. Feel better now?
>
> Noted: You took an excellent observing report and used it as a soapbox
> for one of your many Usenet pet peeves.
>
> At the risk of reminding you of the painfully obvious, Usenet is not
> your Yahoo! group, sparky. You want to play netcop, Officer Greg, do so
> on your own turf.
>
> The unmitigated gall of you to take a fine report and use it as a
> launching pad for one of your seemingly endless Usenet whines. Gawd,
> you are a tedious and trifling whiner.
>
> Isn't this around the point where you pick up your toys and leave
> Usenet for good -- for the umpteenth time? Oh, that's right, you
> killfiled me eons ago, and suggested others follow suit.
>
> Excellent job, Lumpy. Ignore the background noises.
>
> --
> -John Steinberg

Date: 09 Aug 2006 11:58:38
From: John Steinberg
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

In article <1155136540.179065.211000@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com >,
<capellasoft@yahoo.com > wrote:

> I just came across this post by accident using Google. No wonder you
> are in my lill file, John.

Top-posting too now, Greg?
We sit in wonder.
As you dodge the question, yet again.
Try reading the first letter of each line of this post. It's you.

--
-John Steinberg
email: not@thistime.invalid

Date: 09 Aug 2006 14:51:39
From:
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

My comment was entirely civil and appropriate.

And I never said I was leaving here. I'm just going to make this my
last post to this particular bunch of jerks. Go right ahead, you can
respond all you want. I will not bother to defeat my kill file any
longer using Google so I'll never see it.

You really are a piece of work to make such of a fool of yourself with
such pettiness. I sincerely suggest you seek professional help.

And let me just say this, if I ever have the misfortune to meet you in
person my advice is to duck.

Date: 09 Aug 2006 18:26:15
From: John Steinberg
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

In article <1155160299.202743.193040@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com >,
<capellasoft@yahoo.com > wrote:

> And let me just say this, if I ever have the misfortune to meet you in
> person my advice is to duck.

You talking to me, cupcake?

--
-John Steinberg
email: not@thistime.invalid

Date: 09 Aug 2006 15:25:10
From: Brian Tung
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Cue Rodney King.

--
Brian Tung <brian@isi.edu >
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.html

Date: 09 Aug 2006 18:32:18
From: John Steinberg
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Brian Tung wrote:

> Cue Rodney King.

What?

--
-John Steinberg
email: not@thistime.invalid

Date: 09 Aug 2006 16:17:24
From: Brian Tung
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

John Steinberg wrote:
> > Cue Rodney King.
>
> What?

Rodney King was the focus of one set of L.A. riots. His beating at the
hands of four L.A. cops was captured on videotape, leading to a trial in
which the cops were largely acquitted (maybe totally acquitted? I don't
recall). This sparked a swarm of race-related riots around town.

In the aftermath of the verdict, one of the prominent sound bites was
King himself, at a press conference, bemoaning the situation: "Can't we
all get along? I mean, can't we all just get along?" Or words to that
effect. I'm not sure he was all that lucid at the time; he might have
been in shock.

--
Brian Tung <brian@isi.edu >
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.html

Date: 09 Aug 2006 19:27:48
From: John Steinberg
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Brian Tung wrote:

> Rodney King was the focus ...

I know all about Rodney King. What I want to know is who Greg just
threatened.

Why don't you ask him?

--
-John Steinberg
email: not@thistime.invalid

Date: 09 Aug 2006 17:07:54
From: Brian Tung
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

John Steinberg wrote:
> I know all about Rodney King. What I want to know is who Greg just
> threatened.
>
> Why don't you ask him?

Sorry, I must be confused. My comment was not particularly context
sensitive, sort of a general (perhaps not very hopeful) "Let's just get
along." Honestly, that's all I meant. It certainly was not meant to be
directed just at you; sorry for any confusion I might have caused
myself.

--
Brian Tung <brian@isi.edu >
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.html

Date: 09 Aug 2006 21:03:11
From: John Steinberg
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Brian Tung wrote:

> Sorry, I must be confused. My comment was not particularly context
> sensitive, sort of a general (perhaps not very hopeful) "Let's just get
> along." Honestly, that's all I meant. It certainly was not meant to be
> directed just at you; sorry for any confusion I might have caused
> myself.

I understood the context, the scope, and the reason for the comment.

I just did not know that it was in your general nature to trivialize an
explicit threat by invoking a hackneyed pop culture reference.

In case you missed it, here is Greg Crinklaw's comment again:

"And let me just say this, if I ever have the misfortune to meet you in
person my advice is to duck."

--
-John Steinberg
email: not@thistime.invalid

Date: 09 Aug 2006 18:08:06
From: Brian Tung
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

John Steinberg wrote:
> I just did not know that it was in your general nature to trivialize an
> explicit threat by invoking a hackneyed pop culture reference.

Oh dear. I don't mean to offend, but I don't think I trivialized the
threat. I merely wanted to prevent escalation of hostilities, explicitly
by invoking a lame, hackneyed pop culture reference. Thought it might
deflect, by virtue of that lameness and hacknification.

I guess it didn't work. Sorry about that.

--
Brian Tung <brian@isi.edu >
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.html

Date: 09 Aug 2006 21:23:29
From: John Steinberg
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Brian Tung wrote:

> Oh dear. I don't mean to offend, but I don't think I trivialized the
> threat.

I guess we can just agree to disagree then.

> I guess it didn't work. Sorry about that.

No worries. I have to pick up a police report on a very different
matter Friday. I can just make a complaint to the local police at that
time and Greg can fly out to NY to answer the charges once the DA has
reviewed and filed the charges.

--
-John Steinberg
email: not@thistime.invalid

Date: 09 Aug 2006 23:36:26
From: Lumpy Darkness
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 19:27:48 -0400, John Steinberg <seesig@bottom.invalid >
>
>What I want to know is who Greg just threatened.
>

I think the answer to that is, when suggesting publicly you "duck", everyone.

Let's get back to astronomy... and away from ruffled feathers.

That wild duck is something, eh? :-)

---
Lumpy Darkness

Date: 09 Aug 2006 19:45:18
From: John Steinberg
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Lumpy Darkness < @ > wrote:

> I think the answer to that is, when suggesting publicly you "duck", everyone.

That would be in keeping with his hapless flailing.

> That wild duck is something, eh? :-)

Great open cluster indeed, Lumpy.

--
-John Steinberg
email: not@thistime.invalid

Date: 11 Aug 2006 00:07:24
From: David Knisely
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Lumpy Darkness posted:

> That wild duck is something, eh?

Yup, especially when you use a binoviewer on it. It almost looks 3D in
places and it seems to have a more rectangular outline. I didn't used
to be a binoviewer advocate, but now that I have one, I try it on a lot
of deep-sky objects, sometimes with surprisingly good results. BTW:
were you the one with the scope named "Harvey"?
--
David W. Knisely KA0CZC@navix.net
Prairie Astronomy Club: http://www.prairieastronomyclub.org
Hyde Memorial Observatory: http://www.hydeobservatory.info/

**********************************************
* Attend the 13th Annual NEBRASKA STAR PARTY *
* July 23-28, 2006, Merritt Reservoir *
* http://www.NebraskaStarParty.org *
**********************************************

Date: 09 Aug 2006 12:08:13
From: M104galaxy@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

This is a hoot!! Bunch of smart-ass, self-styled "experts" flaming each
other.

Get a life; get on topic; no one cares about your "proper" net use
opinions!

Argue about what constitutes "primary colors" since that seems to be
amateur astronomy in the eyes of some. Or maybe why Apple recalled its
top of the line notebooks?? Or why antique computers are better than
modern ones.

Greg Crinklaw wrote:
> Lumpy Darkness wrote:
> > On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 08:23:08 -0400, John Steinberg <seesig@bottom.invalid>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Presumably you also had similar *feelings* when you read anything by
> >> Lewis Carroll, Joseph Conrad, Mark Twain, Gore Vidal or Oscar Wilde?
> >
> > LOL.... John... ya shudda been a surgeon.
>
> For the record, I never even tried to be in a community with any of
> those people. This is, after all, a community isn't it?
>
> How can you be nice to someone who is so mean? I don't get it. The
> rest of what he said was out of line, pure and simple.
>
> I was simply trying to make this a better place. I did so respectfully
> and with no ill intent. And for that I get dumped on? What a bunch of
> jerks here. How do you guys sleep at night?
>
> --
> 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://www.skyhound.com/sh/comets.html
>
> To reply take out your eye

Date: 10 Aug 2006 08:44:50
From: M104galaxy@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Tracking you down would be child's play since you have a history of
over 4,000 posts here--you need to get a life. I might have to invest
in a call to Dave who is easily reachable:

"You know, Phil, John called my office again today and asked that we
resolve
this amicably. It seems that you and some of the others from your
'private'
and 'moderated' group seem to be inordinately concerned about defending
John
Steinberg's honor there and now here, or is it simply your own conduct
?
Please don't distress yourself any further, since your founder has --
for
the second time in two days -- tried to bury the hatchet and has asked
me to
tell everyone involved to 'calm down.' I suggest you back off, and
also
suggest that the use (or misuse) of ALL CAPITAL LETTERS is not all that
effective, just silly. Oh, and posting private posts is really
against the
grain on this group, so don't do it again or your own posts might come
back
to haunt you.

By the way, I like your choice of e-mail address, fake@fake etc?
Couldn't
think of a better rejoinder if I tried.

Have a nice life, Phil. Dave "

John Steinberg wrote:
>
> > What are you afraid of? Why are you hiding? Rather childish e-mail
> > address, don't you think?
>
> No, but unlike you I do think.
>
> BTW, The richness of the irony in your commentary above is delightful.
>
> As for your ignorance, that's just commonplace.
>
> --
> -John Steinberg
> email: not@thistime.invalid

Date: 10 Aug 2006 08:04:07
From: M104galaxy@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Pot-kettle-black; you are truly pathetic

Post a real e-mail address or better yet, your New York address and I
will be pleased to give you a visit, eh? I get to the city frequently.

What are you afraid of? Why are you hiding? Rather childish e-mail
address, don't you think?

And don't forget to let us know what your "DA" has to say--when he is
able to stop laughing. Maybe Spitzer would give you an audience??

John Steinberg wrote:

> So many are filled with so much false bravado on Usenet. Especially
> the ignorant semi-anonymous right-wing trolls.
>
> You're welcome to come to NY and express yourself to my face, coward.
>
> --
> -John Steinberg
> email: not@thistime.invalid

Date: 10 Aug 2006 11:19:32
From: John Steinberg
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

In article <1155222247.575402.177240@q16g2000cwq.googlegroups.com >,
<"M104galaxy@gmail.com" > wrote:

> Post a real e-mail address or better yet, your New York address and I
> will be pleased to give you a visit, eh? I get to the city frequently.

And you want to visit me because_____? What's your name, stranger?

> What are you afraid of? Why are you hiding? Rather childish e-mail
> address, don't you think?

No, but unlike you I do think.

BTW, The richness of the irony in your commentary above is delightful.

As for your ignorance, that's just commonplace.

--
-John Steinberg
email: not@thistime.invalid

Date: 10 Aug 2006 07:20:41
From: M104galaxy@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

I am waiting with baited breath. Please keep us posted on your "expert"
command of the "legal process"--I'm sure Greg is scared to death and
running to a cave to hide, eh??

What a pathetic milktoast you must be if you took Greg's comments as an
"imminent physical threat". Typical New York liberal--all smartass bark
and no bite, eh?

Wait, I forgot, Hillary ( I change my mind daily ) Clinton will protect
you, eh?

Carson???

John Steinberg wrote:
> In article <1155214275.280228.126690@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com>,
> <"M104galaxy@gmail.com"> wrote:
>
> > Now you have rfinally come up with something funny nutcase. The NY DA
> > will be laughing for an hour after you leave his office.
> >
> > Extradition for a perceived net threat to get punched? You live in la
> > la land.
>
> Clearly you have no grasp of the violation in question. I could refer
> you to the actual statute, and I could waste my time explaining the
> actual legal process to you, but you're just another in a long line of
> net kooks who wouldn't comprehend it anyway.
>
> BTW, how's life in Carson, bozo?
>
> And btw, extradition does not factor into this at all.
>
> I guess we'll see who's laughing in due time, eh?
>
> --
> -John Steinberg
> email: not@thistime.invalid

Date: 10 Aug 2006 10:39:42
From: John Steinberg
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

In article <1155219641.610752.55340@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com >,
<"M104galaxy@gmail.com" > wrote:

> I am waiting with baited breath.

What did you bait it with? The foul odor of your own stupidity?

It's "bated breath," moron.

> Please keep us posted on your "expert" command of the "legal
> process"--I'm sure Greg is scared to death and running to a cave to
> hide, eh??

It's good that you're aware of Greg's feelings and whereabouts. Neither
concern me.

> What a pathetic milktoast you must be if you took Greg's comments as an
> "imminent physical threat".

Don't invent quotes and, please, learn some basic grammar and spelling.
Just because you may be an idiot doesn't mean you have to look and read
like one.

> Typical New York liberal--all smartass bark
> and no bite, eh?

So many are filled with so much false bravado on Usenet. Especially
the ignorant semi-anonymous right-wing trolls.

You're welcome to come to NY and express yourself to my face, coward.

--
-John Steinberg
email: not@thistime.invalid

Date: 10 Aug 2006 05:51:15
From: M104galaxy@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

Now you have rfinally come up with something funny nutcase. The NY DA
will be laughing for an hour after you leave his office.

Extradition for a perceived net threat to get punched? You live in la
la land.

John Steinberg wrote:
> Brian Tung wrote:
>
> > Oh dear. I don't mean to offend, but I don't think I trivialized the
> > threat.
>
> I guess we can just agree to disagree then.
>
> > I guess it didn't work. Sorry about that.
>
> No worries. I have to pick up a police report on a very different
> matter Friday. I can just make a complaint to the local police at that
> time and Greg can fly out to NY to answer the charges once the DA has
> reviewed and filed the charges.
>
> --
> -John Steinberg
> email: not@thistime.invalid

Date: 10 Aug 2006 10:05:36
From: John Steinberg
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

In article <1155214275.280228.126690@m73g2000cwd.googlegroups.com >,
<"M104galaxy@gmail.com" > wrote:

> Now you have rfinally come up with something funny nutcase. The NY DA
> will be laughing for an hour after you leave his office.
>
> Extradition for a perceived net threat to get punched? You live in la
> la land.

Clearly you have no grasp of the violation in question. I could refer
you to the actual statute, and I could waste my time explaining the
actual legal process to you, but you're just another in a long line of
net kooks who wouldn't comprehend it anyway.

BTW, how's life in Carson, bozo?

And btw, extradition does not factor into this at all.

I guess we'll see who's laughing in due time, eh?

--
-John Steinberg
email: not@thistime.invalid

Date: 10 Aug 2006 22:17:33
From: darkness.lumpy@gmail.com
Subject: Re: Reflections from Coe: Looking In The Mirror Again...

David Knisely wrote:
> Lumpy Darkness posted:
>
> > That wild duck is something, eh?
>
> Yup, especially when you use a binoviewer on it. It almost looks 3D in
> places and it seems to have a more rectangular outline. I didn't used
> to be a binoviewer advocate, but now that I have one, I try it on a lot
> of deep-sky objects, sometimes with surprisingly good results. BTW:
> were you the one with the scope named "Harvey"?

HI David,

Nice to see another long time participant here on s.a.a. I've been
away for years.

I'll have to ask a friend to use the binoviewers on that one.

Harvey is Jay Reynold's Freeman's 14" SCT. He used to haul it up to
Fremont Peak in a Geo Metro! Jay still gets out, but not nearly as
often as he used to.

Thanks for getting this thread back on topic...