Re: [APML] hangin' around, was Stunned silence

[Gene Horr <genehorr@texas.net>]

Paul Howell wrote:

> I find it astounding that someone would get flamed - maybe I'm just a little
> dense but what is there to defend or attack? Do people get flamed over what
> choice of film they make? Good grief, it's just a light sensor.

Well, the discussions referred to were a little more off-topic.  Some people
were wanting this list to be more of a generic astro-imaging list as many
of the aspects are the same no matter what the detector, while others were
stating that there were plenty of lists for that type of discussions and
wanted the focus to remain on film imaging as this is the only list that
has film as its focus.

I lean towards the latter group.  I also take part in a CCD and generic
imaging list also.  So my attitude is not "this is better than that" but
that there is a proper place for each type of discussion.

Rob Gendler asked me privately whether he would be welcome to take part
in any discussions.  My reply to him was that as long as discussions were
limited to areas where there is an overlap (post image processing, guiding
problems, etc) as opposed to CCD-specific discussions (Bias/Dark frames, 
etc.) that he may get some minor grumbling <g> but that I couldn't see
any real objections.  As long as they are true contributions and are on
topic (and don't consume all of the bandwidth) I don't personally see a
problem with these types of discussions.

You'll see many of the same names here as on some of the CCD lists.  Again,
I don't think that it is an anit-CCD attitude so much as a desire to keep
the SNR high.  A discussion that by itself is information quickly becomes
noise when you are having to wade through the same thing on 3 or 4 different
lists.

Gene Horr
genehorr@texas.net

--  APML Archives at <http://astro.umsystem.edu/apml/>  ---
             Unsubscribe at <majordomo@seds.org>