Re: ONLINE ATMJ

["Bill Cook" <atmj1@conceptsnet.com>]

Concerning an ATMJ like website, Michael Lindner wrote:

>In short, while it sounds easy, it ain't. I liken it to cooking. You
might say, most people cook anyway, and cooking a little more and
sharing it would be easy. Yes, but restaurants charge for a reason.

Mike Lindner<

His other comments were also on the mark. It would seem that I have gained a
convert. You may recall that Mike and I were using a lot of "bandwidth" a
year and a half ago discussing this very issue. Initially, he seemed to
think I was trying to put down other ATM sites because they "competed" with
ATMJ. That argument died rather quickly when I pointed out that 1) I was
among the first to promote the LIST and 2) that the ATMJ site features a
number of links to other 'competing' ATM sites. So what happened to Michael?
He has had a time in the driver's seat. His theory has given way to 'been
there, done that' and 'Bill wasn't as crude and crazy as I thought.'

I can just see some folks jumping up and down to bring about an online
Journal! That's great. Now here is the reality: Where were they during all
the times I was begging for help? It seems that words and feelings are a lot
easier to muster than action. It is really easy to throw stones at the
Journal for not being color, or not being glossy, or (the eternal) on time.
It is quite another to put your life, livelihood, and family relations on
the line as others who went before.

Michael mentions that splintering the effort could cause the Journal to
fold. Of course, that is possible. If I had a lick of sense I would have
pulled the plug and shamed myself years ago. But then thinking has never
been my strong suit. What impetus do I have right now to keep it going?
Every time I turn around someone with more ideals than experience is talking
about ways to undermine it. The Journal has never been on a great financial
footing. And, while other small publishers might never admit this, it is
undoubtedly the same for them. One such publisher has, on 3 occasions, told
me that he has more time and money than he knows what to do with - in those
exact words. Folks who are financially set, need not count their own time as
a cost, because it need not be tied to food on the table. Alas, when I'm
cut..I bleed. I think it only fair that I spend some time being
independently wealthy.I have always been independently poor. And quite
frankly, the Journal has helped make it so. At our last budgetary meeting
Debbie and I figured that it would take 7 to 10 years to get back to the
point (financially) that we were at before I started the Journal. I will be
60 then.

Before, some folks thought that I was just being selfish and crying in my
proverbial beer with such comments. However, right now, I am prepared to be
put out of my misery. I was once a prolific telescope maker and tinkerer.
But, except for the all brass Baywatch Telescope and my Houghton designs I
have produced nothing in the last 8 years! I haven't had time. I have been
up night after night trying to keep the Journal between the ditches. I could
use a little time off to regain my life, health, and finances.

I will say that anyone who wants to do a magazine - on the net or off - will
find that finances will NOT be the greatest problem. Their greatest
challenges will lie with those who promise them the moon but deliver
nothing, those who give them advice that would put them out of business in 3
months and get upset because they won't take it, those whose need to be in
print is so great that they, when not getting their material published for
valid reasons of ethical journalism, will storm of to publish it themselves
and consider you as enemy - some college puke to be conquered - from that
point on.

Oh, and the story could go on.

Frankly, I wonder why all those with so much energy to expend to promote
telescope making have failed in droves when I have called for the most
simply and routine help to keep the Journal alive?

I am reminded of the never-ending debate on getting TM reprint rights. YOU,
as members of the ATMA won that battle over a year ago. Today, a grand total
of two folks have come forth with an old TM article they wanted us to
reprint. Where is all the commitment and fire now. Enough energy was
expended on that one topic over the last 3 years to light Chicago for hours.

Seems to my harsh, unfeeling, stupid, and self-serving-self that it would be
better for us NOT to spend time trying to reinvent the wheel but rather to
help the one we have had for 8 years roll along.

Just a thought.

Bill
Editor / publisher, ATM Journal
Telescope Maker (and proud of it)