The vast majority of observers at our regulat sites never post an OI by
email or on the website and never will. Many people aren't on TAC or just
lurk or are away from their computers or decide at the last minute. That's
the history, so you should multiply the OIs by a factor of 3 to 10 to get a
sense of how many peole will show up on a good night.
Andrew Pierce
-----Original Message-----
From: sf-bay-tac-bounces@No-Spam [mailto:sf-bay-tac-bounces@No-Spam]On
Behalf Of P T Chambers
Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2004 11:21 AM
To: The Astronomy Connection
Subject: Re: OI posting WAS Re: [TAC] OR Montebello 090504
I think I predicted this. THe OI calendar is just plain more difficult to
use. YOu have to go to the website, sign in, load it, and put your entry
in.
I feel like most are like me. They read the TAC messages but the website
is not a normally visited item. Plus, putting an OI in makes it more
"official" and too many things interrupt and it is then a pain to go back
and change it.
When OIs were just posted on TAC, they were extremely informational. But
since the Calendar has appeared, this aspect has been lost IMO. When you
post a message with an OI, you can "explain" your intent a lot easier not
to mention that it is easy to post another message saying you couldnt
make it.
To me, TAC has become a lot less useful because of the calendar. Email
is a daily occurance and gets my attention. The webpage is accessed when
I cant remember if Houge was this Fri or next Fri.
JMO
---------
Phil Chambers [ptchamb@No-Spam] (S.F. Bay Area - Calif. USA)
On Tue, 7 Sep 2004, Stacy Jo McDermott wrote:
>
> I don't think it's passe Alan - just how it works. Sometimes I won't
> know until the last minute if I'm going out to observe (and with no 'net
> access at home, makes it kinda of hard to let everyone know). I posted
> my OI because I made advanced plans and had it written down in my
> planner. But it is nice to know who is showing up where if at all
> possible.
>
>
>
>
> Stacy
>
> "Why yes, there is a difference between photon deprivation & PMS."
> ~Konstellation Kitty
>
> Just give me a dark, clear, starry Kaleeforneea sky and no one gets hurt.
>
> www.stacyjomcdermott.com
>
> >From: Allan Schaffer <allan@No-Spam> >Reply-To: The Astronomy Connection
> <sf-bay-tac@No-Spam> >To: The Astronomy Connection <sf-bay-tac@No-Spam>
> >Subject: Re: [TAC] OR Montebello 090504 >Date: Tue, 07 Sep 2004 10:34:12
> -0700 > > >I couldn't help but notice the number of ORs posted over the
> past two days, >and yet there were very few OIs. Obviously no obligation
> is imposed amongst >TAC and folks come and go for observing as they
> please. But it made me >curious -- has posting an OI on TAC become
> passe'? What gives? > >Allan >ps. Stacy did post an OI. But 13 or 14
> scopes..? wow. > > >Mark Wagner wrote: > > [about Henry Coe, 09/04/2004]
> > > Nice turnout last night... good to see so many friends. > >Stacy Jo
> Mc Dermott wrote: > > There were about 13 or 14 telescopes at Montebello
> on Sunday night, 5 > > September, 2004 > >Dillon, Dillon, & Kuh wrote: >
> > Last night Jim Everitt and I headed up to Coyote Lake, [...]There was >
> > a family with scopes, Scott Baker, Alex Avtanski, another man, Lou de >
> > los Reyes[...] >
>
>
Received on Tue Sep 7 11:34:26 2004