A question on Newtonian collimation

I just don't get this. I should have left the secondary alone as it came
from Orion. Damn it.

I purchased a laser and an Orion collimation eyepiece, and when I looked
through the site tube, things didn't look right according to the "Adventures
in Collimation" web page created by Bryan Greer. Now, I'm quite sure that he
knows what he's talking about, so this is no indictment on him. I just don't
understand what's wrong (with my abilities).

I get everything looking (to me) like it does in the final image on his web
page, and the laser confirms that everything is aligned (and if you're going
to say "that's why lasers are bad", you can just shut up thank you, I don't
want to here it. Before I messed with the secondary, the laser made the
images better than they've been since I messed with the collimation eyepiece
and found myself in hell).

Anyway, I take the scope outside and put in a medium power eyepiece and
wrack out focus on Polaris to make the course adjustment donut (which I also
do with my SCTs). Here's the problem, the donut hole is _way_ off to one
side. On one side of focus, it is to the North, on the other side of focus
it is to the South. I don't know which is "in" focus and which is "out"
focus, but one of these puts the donut hole closer to center than the other.

I am getting really frustrated by this. When I buy a telescope, I am buying
a solution, not a problem.

Does anyone have a web page with images like Bryan's, that is more
comprehensive on the _process_, without going into overkill optical theory
like you'll find with Nils Olof Carlin. I am sure that these guys know there
stuff real well, but I just don't understand it. In fact, I don't _want_ to
understand it, I just want to _do_ it. If I can't fix this soon, I'm going
to sell the stupid scope, cheap, to the first person who shows up at my
house here in Massachusetts.

Now you know why I prefer my SCT. I don't have to do any of these mental
gymnastics with centering optical paths and messing with offsets. I sure
wish I could afford a 6" F7 apo, so I could have near perfect optical
performance, collimation set at the factory, and my life back.

I admit it, I don't like to do scope maintenance. Not interested in making
telescopes. Not interested in what makes them work. Not in the least. Just
want to look through them and image with them, to see what lies beyond the
naked eye view. That's how I define the hobby. I have an auto-mechanic.
Don't like to change my own oil or tune my vehicles. Don't like to paint my
house, so it's wrapped in vinyl. Don't like to bang nails, so I hire a
carpenter. Don't like to mix concrete. Don't like to do plumbing. I make a
living _looking_ for computer problems (while most sane people try like hell
to avoid them). My daily quota of dealing with problems is exhausted at
work.

I like yard work, and I love my kids, who don't get enough of my time as it
is. When they get it, I'd rather not be thinking about how much I _hate_ my
Newtonian OTA right now.

Now that I vented, can someone either help, or come take this scope (XT10)
off my hands for $325, so I can stop stressing over it. If you live in MA,
want to help, or want to buy the scope, email me at
spaul_at_Net1plus_dot_com, and put ASTRO:XT10 in the subject line. I'm fed
up with Newtonians. They suck.

-Stephen