s.a.a. vs. other forums

sci.astro.amateur or Astromart or Cloudy Night forums (fora)??

I browse & post to all three. The recent threads on what's happened to
s.a.a. got me thinking about the history of astro newsgroups and the
net. I'd be interested in other s.a.a. & AOL veterans' thoughts about
this...

Years ago, on AOL, there was a wonderful astronomy community. It was
great being able to browse by topics, with the threads nicely organized.
I can remember discovering s.a.a. and, at first, being completely put
off by the anarchy, and the massive list of unrelated threads. It took
lots of effort to find relevant material on s.a.a. It was the
difference between a small community and a frontier crossroads. I spent
far more time within AOL.

Soon, however, s.a.a. grew, and many, or most AOL regulars seem to shift
locations... Plus, s.a.a. was free (if your place of work had net
access and was OK with personal use after hours) while AOL cost $$. And
s.a.a. had a wider range of diverse voices, with more posts, and more
people likely to help---and do so very quickly. It became a vibrant
city, with all sorts of types, information, & notions. It was also a
time of many observing reports.

We're in stage 3 now of newsgroups and the web (back to the future). It
seems that hosted or moderated groups are again coming back to the
fore... there is again a sense of community, one can drop in from time
to time on AM and CN and find relevant threads easily because they are
grouped by topic, and there is a remarkably high signal to noise ratio
and an incredibly helpful, welcoming environment. There *is* a
different feel there than here...

The city here is becoming an underworld, though still a fascinating
place to visit, especially if one actively filters out subjects!

(The specialized yahoo newsgroups are yet another venue, with their own
atmosphere and issues.)

Larry Stedman
Vestal

Back when I got online full time outside of BBS'ing, I was on CI$ and it was
nice too. I was also here, via the old internet gated Muskrat.com. When I
moved back to the mainland for awhile I only had CI$, then (A)lway (O)ff
(L)ine took over CI$ and killed the older text only message system and I had
to move full time to SAA.

I also run some e-mail lists, two telescope types on yahoogroups, but the
rest of them are on UK servers and see "0" spam and no 'noise' at all.
Granted most the users don't post much, but they are free to do so. I also
have a Bino group on yahoogroups and all of them are set up so no spam gets
posted and no noise either.

And I have taken the route to filter out the garbage here, via killfile,
message rules, and I get only the header title first, thus allowing me to
pick want I might want to read.

I have a number of web sites I take care of, but I use the web mostly for
searching for images I use with ICM for e-mail. Otherwise, the newsgroups is
where I read/post the most.

"Larry Stedman" wrote in message
...
sci.astro.amateur or Astromart or Cloudy Night forums (fora)??

I browse & post to all three. The recent threads on what's happened to
s.a.a. got me thinking about the history of astro newsgroups and the
net. I'd be interested in other s.a.a. & AOL veterans' thoughts about
this...

Larry Stedman wrote:
[usenet vs forums]

I vote for free speech (and accept that means hearing some **** I
don't like) and a decent user-interface. The web is horribly slow and
you can't customize it. Usenet may be full of noise, but it is rapidly
obvious which threads, sub-threads or posters will spoil the SNR and a
good newsreader can ensure you need never see them again.


Tim
--
May contain traces of nuts.

On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 01:27:12 +0100, Tim Auton
wrote:

Larry Stedman wrote:
[usenet vs forums]

I vote for free speech (and accept that means hearing some **** I
don't like) and a decent user-interface. The web is horribly slow and
you can't customize it.

But you do get the pleasure (if you go live) of wading through
the ads Yahoo tosses up every 2nd post.
-Rich

you don't get them in e-mail.

"RichA" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 01:27:12 +0100, Tim Auton
wrote:

Larry Stedman wrote:
[usenet vs forums]

I vote for free speech (and accept that means hearing some **** I
don't like) and a decent user-interface. The web is horribly slow and
you can't customize it.

But you do get the pleasure (if you go live) of wading through
the ads Yahoo tosses up every 2nd post.
-Rich

Larry Stedman wrote:
sci.astro.amateur or Astromart or Cloudy Night forums (fora)??

I browse & post to all three. The recent threads on what's happened
to
s.a.a. got me thinking about the history of astro newsgroups and the
net. I'd be interested in other s.a.a. & AOL veterans' thoughts
about
this...



Hi:

Well, nothing much _has_ happened to s.a.a. I don't think it's really
_much_ different than it was 10 or so years ago when I began posting
regularly. There have always been plenty of trolls, lots of off-topic
postings, and plenty of politico-cultural ranting...much of that from
folks who should know better.

I do sometimes fear the group is slowly becoming more like its
lamentably debased parent group, sci.astro. That the dicusssions of
observing and equipment and other amateur topics are becoming fewer and
the "foolishness" more frequent. I hope not.

But the main difference? All too many of the old-timers have left. I
look around, and not many of the folk I used to hang out with here are
still here--at least not regularly. Heck, _I_ don't post nearly as much
as I used to? Why? Astromart, and Yahoogroups, take up a lot of my
time. Also, like me, many old-timers now own numerous astronomy
Yahoogroups and spend some time administering them. Lots of folks like
Cloudynights' forums, too. Bottom line? Yes, as you note, there's a lot
more to read and participate in than there was in the early -
mid-nineties. Back then it was s.a.a. and Majordomo lists. ;-)

"Underworld"? Not really. Not if you mean original and revolutionary
and forbidden stuff. Most of the junk I see here can hardly be called
that. What is see as far as the off-topic/troll posts is mostly
foolishness like, "we-never-landed-on-the-moon" and its sisters,
"the-big-bang-never-happened" and
"the-earth-is-not-billions-of-years-old" and well...fill in the blanks.
;-)

In the end, s.a.a. is what we make it. If you want to see hard core
observing, ATMing, and equipment posts, POST 'EM. To some extent,
keeping on topic also helps discourage trolls. If all they see is
"Report on the Optical Quality of a Questar 3.5," and NOBODY REPLIES to
their "Darwin was a putz" posts, many of 'em will get discouraged and
go away for a while. I still think that an unmoderated group has a
place in amateur astronomy and is a must. That doesn't mean that we
settle for something like sci.astro, but that the direction of our
group is decided by a consensus of its "members." I think that's a good
thing.

I may not post like I used to, but I'm sticking with s.a.a. unless and
until she goes down by the head in deep water. ;-)

Peace,
Rod Mollise
Author of:_Choosing and Using a Schmidt Cassegrain Telescope_
http://members.aol.com/RMOLLISE/index.html

SAA is probably the group I check most regularly. Back in the 80s, when
sci.astro was the only game in town, I read it when I could. Sure,
there's junk now just as there was then. But I try to keep up more or
less on an intermittent basis with 40 Yahoo groups, not all of them
astro groups. And Cloudynights forums, recently.

Unless you use a cliassical newsreader, you don't have to wat time
downloading junk. I'm selective about what I read, as I sus[ect nearly
everyone else is. It's good to have a forum where you can talk about
anything astro you like, as well as specialized forums.

You can never tell where you will find that nugget of information that
will make your observing life better.

Clear skies,
Shneor

Yes, it is like a "Keg Party" where many of the folks have had way too much
to drink and should not be allowed to touch the keyboard!! :-)

"AstroHoney" wrote in message
oups.com...
There are too many forums; it dilutes the posting volume to the point
where some of them are pratically dead. Searching is problematic
because Google can't spider Yahoo groups (for example), and Yahoo's own
search interface is next to useless. So newbies post repeat topics or
worse, cross post to SAA, Yahoo, CN and A-mart, etc. There's also the
issue that many threads are indeed cross-topic and should go in a
general forum instead of something specialized. Yes, SAA may be a
trash bin for astronomical pursuits but I like it that way.

I also like free speech. Posting at A-mart and C-N is like going to a
tea party, whereas SAA is a bit more like a keg party.

AstroHoney

It's been almost five months since my last post to s.a.a. I think it
was June of 1995 when I first hit the "Send" button and made a post,
here. I had recently acquired a 10-inch Newtonian to feed a growing
appetite for galaxies and was thrilled to discover this newsgroup. Back
then, s.a.a. regulars included many experienced deep-sky hounds.
Observing threads were a staple of the forum, and the subjects ranged
from the typical "How do I find M51?" threads to the esoteric (at the
time) "Has anybody observed the Frosty Leo nebula?". I learned a lot
and looked forward to catching up on the latest messages, each day.

At the same time, I was very active in the AOL Astronomy Club. I helped
maintain the file archives and even started one of the two weekly chat
nights in the AOL Planetarium. The level of discussion on AOL may not
have equaled that of s.a.a., but the enthusiasm was there as was the
opportunity for real-time interaction with fellow amaeur astronomers.
Between AOL and s.a.a., my astronomy jones was well sated, enough so
that I wasn't active in a brick & mortar astronomy club between late
1996 and 2001.

Over the last two years, my online astronomy activities have gradually
migrated from AOL and s.a.a. to other forums. The migration began when
I found Amastro and, to my surprise and enjoyment, many of the top
observers I'd first encountered on s.a.a. People actually discuss
visual observing, often on a daily basis. This is in stark contrast to
s.a.a., where the most active threads for the last several years have
been political rants, religion vs. science debates, and intellectual
sparring--if you can call it that--with Nancy and Min. The last straw
for me were the self-appointed "regulars" who decided that the s.a.a.
charter didn't apply to them.

Discovering the Yahoo groups was like discovering online astronomy
forums, again, for the first time. Here's a newsflash: moderation
works. Discussions stay on-topic, spammers and flamers are quickly
shown the exit, and people show a level of courtesy and respect that's
been largely absent from s.a.a. for many years. Over the last couple of
years, I've joined several observing and equipment groups in that
forum.

About a year ago, I found my way into "Cloudy Nights"
(http://www.cloudynights.com/ ). CN has replaced s.a.a as my general
interest astronomy forum. It's a large forum, with a variety of
interests represented. Off-topic discussions are allowed but confined
to an area outside the astronomy forums. It's a much happier and
healthier place than s.a.a, particularly for the novice amateur
astronomer.

Here, are the s.a.a. stats for 2004: http://tinyurl.com/dkz4p
Going by the thread titles, there appear to be a total of 2 out of 40
that were directly related to visual observing. And as has been the
case for several years, the most active threads have absolutely nothing
to do with astronomy and everything to do with people having a need to
vent their spleens in public. This and the ready availability of other
astronomy forums is why s.a.a. saw a 20% drop in the number of 1st time
and returning posters.

On the other hand, it's nice to see that many of the folks I enjoyed
reading in s.a.a. are active in CN and other yahoo groups I frequent.
Leaving s.a.a. hasn't meant having to leave behind my favorite online
people. So, as you might imagine, it's been an easy transition.

Regards,

Bill in Flagstaff