RTE & the Astronomy voice of Ireland

Denton - glad I managed to clear up the misunderstanding and glad that you have accepted my explanation.

I have no issues with any of the contributors to A&S - I actually think the likes of you and Gordon write as well as any of the contributors to Astronomy Now, Sky & Telescope and Astronomy. Really - I'm not saying this to appease anyone.

My beef is with overall value-for-money of A&S. And I totally understand that individual contributors simply write their piece, send it in and that's the end of it. What happens next is, I assume, down to the editorial staff. I guess it is they that can provide approriate responses to my post(s).

And as you say, my judgement of the magazine as a whole is not a reflection of any individual contributor - I'm sure that many others are equally as good as yourself and Gordon. And my post was not meant to be read in any other way. But I guess it can be to write something one way for it to be understood in a different manner.

As far of constellation articles go, it must be pretty hard to write new stuff about objects that change little over millions of years! And I would totally understand a piece written two years ago on Orion, say, would be similar to an article of today - albeit as you say with new photos or star data etc.

I guess the value of a subscription/membership fee to AI/A&S is subjective and a matter of opinion. I'll not go into that suffuce to say that I didn't know I had access to the 21" scope, but even if I did, I guess I'd be in a queue of 6000+

Finally, I guess I'd better go outside and crane the old neck!

Cheers

Dave

Dave,
Thanks for the nice reply. I'm glad we have that sorted out, and thanks also for your comments regarding myself and Gordon as compaired with the the writers for those other excellent magazines. As I said, we do try. For my own part I have always tried in the Spotlight series to mention things you won't find in other magazines, little known objects like DoDz clusters or PK planetary nebulae and the like, to write what I would like to know about the constellations if I were a novice, as well as bits of historical or mythological information that one seldom sees in other publications. I was for example, as far as I know, the first astronomer anywhere in the world to do an article on the gay aspects of astronomy, something that is always ignored when mythology is mentioned. They never tell you what Ganymedes was REALLY doing on Mount Olympus! Maybe you saw that article? I have also tried with the Everything series to cover diverse topics not normally found in other publications, such as General Custer and his observations of Venus, or astronomical errors, funny names, ect.

The A.I. telescope nights are very good, with a range of telescopes being used, up to the club's 21-inch. It is quite a fine telescope, and well worth having a look through. Though quite a lot of people attend the Star-B-Q events, which would feature the 21-inch, not that many would be at the telescope nights, so use of whatever scopes are there wouldn't be a problem. Plus you can always bring your own as well if you want to. The largest scopes might not always be on hand of course. Ring the A.I. office for details.

Indeed, what is free or not is entirly a matter of personal opinion. You pay the same whatever percentage of it you consider covers any particular aspect, or not, as the case may be.

All for now,

Denton

Hey Denton

I remember that.

I gave the mag to girl who showed it to the people in the Gay scene here.

I believe it went down really well.

A good idea!

Conor

Hi Conor,
Thanks for your comments. I had a lot of feedback from that 'Astronomy Isn't As Straight As You Think' article, all positive. Well, there was one letter from a man who said he would cancel his membership if filth like that continued to be published, but he was the only one. On the other hand I received numerous e-mails thanking me for doing it. Part of it was reproduced by Gay Community News as well. One of the reasons I did it was the way everyone else ignored the topic, even going out of their way NOT to mention it, wording aspects of Greek mythology so as to gloss over it. That annoys me. If it is historical fact or correct mythology, then it should be presented as such, not omitted simply because somebody doesn't approve. A bit like those Greeks who tried to stop the Alexander movie because they objected to his being shown as bi-sexual. So what. He was. That didn't make him any less great. Boyfriends or not he still wiped the floor with the greatest armies the ancient world could send against him.

All the best,

Denton