Re: TM & ATMJ #3

[Atmj1@aol.com]

Telescope Making Reprints - Revisited 2 (page 3 of 4)

As I have gone back over this memo so far, I can see where it could be taken
to be caustic. Please do not do so. I am being very frank, but I most
certainly am not attempting to be rude. There is enough of that on the net
without me adding my two cents worth.

You say, "Bill what do you mean talk up the Journal? Most of us are ATMA
members and get the Journal?" That is true. But when I saw the last post from
Jim Piunti and Cary Chleborad, I became curious. Both stress a passion for our
hobby and a desire to get control of the back issues of TM, yet neither are
members of the ATMA. Now then, does that mean I am finding fault with these
folks. No, No, No! I support anyone's right to say, "I don't want ATM
Journal," or "I don't need ATM Journal."  However, I would like folks to know
what it is before making those decisions.

Everyone already knows about the Journal you say!  Aaaannkk!….no cigar! New
members come on board every week who have been ATMing for years and have JUST
heard of the Journal! It is sad, but true. I have been interested in telescope
making since 1960. Yet, although TM started publishing in 1978, I did not get
my first copy until issue #29!! (at which time I bought all the back issues of
course) The only time I had a recollection of TM's existence was as the late
Dick Linkletter, hurriedly shuffled some around in his briefcase as he
prepared to leave a meeting of the Olympic Astronomical Society back in 1982.
Yes, a publication can be overlooked. 

In the memo to Kalmbach, Cary referred to TM as "WONDERFUL." I would second
that. However, I would ask, in all humility, for anyone to grab any of ATMJ's
11 issues (#12 is at the press now) , and compare them side by side with TMs
of the same issue numbers.  Doing so, where does ATMJ fall short, on: content,
mix, credentials of authors, layout or illustrations? 

Now then, if ATM Journal does not fall below standard - especially since, to
this point, it has mostly been a one-man show - should ATM Journal not be
viewed as just as "wonderful"? There is, however, one VERY large difference in
the two publications. One, Telescope Making, is gone and wishing will not
bring it back. The other, ATM Journal, is alive, here, growing, and is backed
by people who are driven by dedication (and a little stupidity), and not
dollars. Which one needs your support worse? Which one can fulfill your
desires for ATMing knowledge best? 

Folks, I understand that the grass is always greener somewhere else, that
everyone else's car is nicer, and that everyone with desktop publishing
software can create a spiffy new website. However, It is my belief (considered
self-serving or not) that that kind of skill should be placed at the disposal
of the ATMA so that those efforts can be focused for the betterment of us all.
I have never been short on ideas on how to build our community into an
indestructible organization. I've just been short on volunteers to help me get
there. 

(Continued...)