Re: ATM "The New S&T"

[Stephen Tonkin <sft@aegis1.demon.co.uk>]

Dennis Hoofnagle <dhoof@az.com> wrote:
>You'll have to admit that with the Telescope Making department being reduced
>to usually two pages for quite some time, their support of telescope making
>as a topic has been token at best.  It would seem reasonable that, if
>indeed, that token contribution on their part has resulted in hundreds or
>thousands of ATM'ers continuing their subscriptions, then they would
>certainly want to continue to include Telescope Making as a department.
>Maybe they thought they could do away with it since they had no complaints
>about how little coverage they have been providing!

Well, how many of us subscribe to this list? Must be several hundred by
now. If each of us wrote to S&T (who, I believe, also monitor this
list), perhaps they would do something.

The other question we need to ask: does S&T get sufficient decent
material to justify a monthly ATM section? There has been some good
stuff of late (eg Gary Seronik's planetary Newtonian), but I have
occasionally felt that they must have been dredging for copy.

However, until I manage to get my French to a standard that I can read
_Ciel et Espace_ without having to resort to a dictionary every dozen
lines or so, I shall probably continue with S&T -- for all its faults
(and they increase with time) it is still the best English language
monthly general astronomy mag I have seen (IMHO, of course).

Now, as a matter of urgency, back to work on the French...

--
Stephen Tonkin