wls@astrovax.UUCP (11/15/83)
I would like to propose the establishment of net.astro. This group would be
for topics in and relating to astronomy. It would NOT be about the space
program, which is the territory of net.space. In a sense I am proposing to
split the discussion of purely astronomical topics from net.space. There is
much excitement going on in astronomy and many people with access to the net
who could contribute information on what is currently happening (indeed many of
those people are making it happen). Many (perhaps, judging from the people at
Princeton, I could even say most) of these people keep silent because they are
not very interested in the contents of net.space (and often, not very interested
in the contents of the rest of the net itself). I am proposing a news group
for these people, to bring them out of the woodwork. And I think that news of
what is happening in astronomy is exciting enough to be of interest to the
general public.
Perhaps what I am really proposing is a net.astro.wizards, in analogy with
net.unix-wizards. Just plain net.astro would then be for questions of the
order of "Why does the moon look larger at the horizon?" which would be
unwelcome in net.astro.wizards. If amateur astronomers wished to establish a
group to discuss topics of interest to them they could call it something like
net.astro.amateur.
Comments? Please feel free to mail comments to me or post them to this
group on the net. This article been posted after consultation with the members
of the Department here, as well has some of the astronomers at the Institute
for Advanced study.
--
Bill Sebok Princeton Univ. Astrophysics
{allegra,akgua,burl,cbosgd,decvax,ihnp4,knpo,princeton}!astrovax!wlsdjb@cbosgd.UUCP (David J. Bryant) (11/15/83)
Count my votes in favor of net.astro and net.astro.wizards.
I too am somewhat disappointed in net.space and would welcome
a different group for discussions of an astronomical nature.
Personally I would be interested in topics dealing with observational
astronomy, since that is where most of my personal experience lies,
but am growing ever more fascinated by recent astrophysics issues
(as long as they can be understood by mortals with no real quantum-mechanics
background).
I sincerely hope we can muster a sufficient level of traffic and
discussion to justify the creation of net.astro and to support its
continued existence. If we have enough astronomy-types on the net,
then let's do it!
David Bryant Bell Labs Columbus, OH (614) 860-4516
(cbosg!djb)
ps: I'd also like to get involved in program exchanges. I have several
astronomy-related programs that I'd be willing to swap for others.
Then too, it'd be nice to find a more seasoned user community that
could help me improve the ones I already have.mark@cbosgd.UUCP (11/15/83)
I would prefer to see it called net.astronomy, since net.astro might be about astronauts, the Houston baseball team, or George Jetson's dog. (Seriously, "astro" does not automatically mean "astronomy" to me.) The disadvantage is if you want subgroups, since net.astronomy is 13 characters long. By the way, the name net.unix-wizards comes from the ARPANET mailing list, and I am not happy with its name. Mark
lmc@denelcor.UUCP (Lyle McElhaney) (11/15/83)
Yes on net.astro. I think that that group alone should be started; leave net.astro.amateur for later, after we see how the news looks. Lyle McElhaney ...(hao,nbires,brl-bmd)!denelcor!lmc
rlp@cbscd5.UUCP (11/16/83)
I'm also in favor of a news group on observational astronomy. But how 'bout calling it 'net.sky'. R. L. Platt cbscd5!rlp
wls@astrovax.UUCP (William L. Sebok) (11/16/83)
> I would prefer to see it called net.astronomy, since net.astro > might be about astronauts, the Houston baseball team, or George > Jetson's dog. (Seriously, "astro" does not automatically mean > "astronomy" to me.) > The disadvantage is if you want subgroups, since net.astronomy > is 13 characters long. It is precisely because I would like to leave open the possiblilty of subgroups that I first considered, then rejected, the name net.astronomy. I know it seems somewhat premature to talk about establishing subgroups before the original group is established. However the people I envision this group serving have different enough needs that I don't think it good to forclose the ability to split it into subgroups. I want to draw out the professional astronomers who have something interesting to talk about. The main concern I have been told about in the month of consultation I did before posting the original article was a fear that the level of discussion in this group would be too trivial to be worth following (and contributing to). Thus the idea of a separate subgroup, tentatively named net.astro.wizards. These people are less computer oriented, and thus need more encouragement, than professionals in systems programming (net.unix-wizards) or artificial intellegence (net.ai). Also, as I previously mentioned, amateur astronomers would then be in good position to establish their own group, tentatively net.astro.amateur. Amateur astronomers and professional astronomers are mostly (but not always) different people. There would then be a well defined place, net.astro, to put beginners questions. For all I care such questions could remain in net.space but I doubt it would work out that way. I think that astronomy has predated astronauts, the Houston baseball team, or George Jetson's dog, and has a better right to the abbreviation "astro". -- Bill Sebok Princeton Univ. Astrophysics {allegra,akgua,burl,cbosgd,decvax,ihnp4,knpo,princeton}!astrovax!wls
philb@shark.UUCP (11/16/83)
I second (third?? fourth??) the net.astro nomination (suggestion?).
Allways interested in celestial bodies,
Phil Biehl (Speaker to Planets)
Tektronix, Inc.
(...decvax!teklabs!tekecs!philb) [UUCP]
(...tekecs!philb.tektronix@rand-relay) [ARPA]notes@ucbcad.UUCP (11/18/83)
#R:astrovax:-12400:ucbesvax:6600008:000:363 ucbesvax!turner Nov 17 23:41:00 1983 I am in favor of it--as net.astronomy, rather than net.astro. Aren't there a fair number of national observatories on the net? And I'm tired of the apollo 13 trivia in net.space, and the gargantuan pie-in-the-sky projects being discussed there, while an explosion of new results in astronomy goes largely unremarked. --- Michael Turner (ucbvax!ucbesvax.turner)
notes@ucbcad.UUCP (11/18/83)
#R:denelcor:-20700:ucbesvax:6600009:000:633 ucbesvax!turner Nov 17 23:51:00 1983 To make a distinction between a net.astro and a net.astro.amateur is not a good one, considering the very significant contributions of the amateurs in the field. The popular view of astronomy is considerably out of proportion to its funding as a science, and to its professional population--about 2000 researchers in the whole world, I think, many of whom are not paid full-time. A great deal of valuable research is carried out by astronomers who are not paid at all. Maybe you're thinking of net.astro.hobby, or net.rec.astro. This is clearly a separate issue from the one proposed. --- Michael Turner (ucbvax!ucbesvax.turner)
mce@teldata.UUCP (mce) (11/19/83)
Yes to net.astro! As I see it net.space should be sufficient for less technical discussions.
rosen@sunybcs.UUCP (Jay Rosenberg) (11/21/83)
Another yes vote from Beefalo.
wls@astrovax.UUCP (11/22/83)
> Perhaps a net.astro (and other scientific > but non-computer groups) would stimulate interest in USENET from some of > the non-programmers at facilities such as ours. The only question is, with > the high volume of traffic, is this a good or bad thing for USENET? >From the standpoint of useful traffic I think it would be a good thing for USENET. -- Bill Sebok Princeton Univ. Astrophysics {allegra,akgua,burl,cbosgd,decvax,ihnp4,kpno,princeton}!astrovax!wls
jack@hp-dcde.UUCP (11/23/83)
#R:astrovax:-12400:hp-dcde:22500003:000:152 hp-dcde!jack Nov 17 14:20:00 1983 But what about the people that think that net.astro means astrology and start posting horoscopes there? -Jack Applin (hplabs!hp-dcd!jack)
wls@astrovax.UUCP (12/03/83)
How can we get distribution to us ARPAnet address people from the new
Forwarded article from net.space
>From: lynn.es@PARC-MAXC.ARPA
--------------------
net.astro, like we have been getting space info through SPACE@MIT-MC?
Is anyone knowledgable about this willing to do it? I would certainly
like to see it happen, and I imagine their are others listening who
agree.
Also, how about the connection the other way? Can I send messages to
net.astro by some trivial understanding of how to address it?
Thanks,
/Don Lynn
To wls: could you place this on net.astro please? Thanks.
--
Bill Sebok Princeton University, Astrophysics
{allegra,akgua,burl,cbosgd,decvax,ihnp4,kpno,princeton}!astrovax!wlsld@hpda.UUCP (12/04/83)
#R:astrovax:-12400:hpda:4800001:000:321
hpda!ld Nov 15 13:43:00 1983
I would be interested in net.astro.wizards for perusal and
net.astro.amature for submissions. I would rather see the key-
word `wizard' replaced with something like `technical' or `pro-
fessional'. I have often found net.space to be less than in-
teresting.
Larry Dwyer
ucbvax!hpda!lddonn@sdchema.UUCP (12/06/83)
Did someone make this group? If so, then their create message missed us. There was some traffic on the clearly nonexistent net.terms about a month or so ago -- but I believe it was intended that net.astro be a real group... Donn Seeley UCSD Chemistry Dept. RRCF ucbvax!sdcsvax!sdchema!donn