![Wink ;)](./images/smilies/icon_wink.gif)
RJN = Robert Nemiroff = That APOD editor guy
geckzilla wrote:I'm not sure mfortsm realizes that his questions just got answered by one of the creators.
I think it means image creators not site creators.mfortsm wrote:My first thought at each images was HOW WAS THAT DONE. Would be nice if the creators could answer visitors questions somehow.
Let's leave intelligence out of this, please, so I can take part in the conversation, because if one in the 99th percentile is required, I need to scoot!StarstruckKid wrote:Here's a thought: how many of you guys/gals aren't in the 99th percentile in intelligence?
owlice, many people and forces in this world will try to convince you that your intelligence doesn't measure up. Never believe them, and never put yourself down. Odds are, you're smarter than you think you are, or you wouldn't be hanging out here!owlice wrote:
Let's leave intelligence out of this, please, so I can take part in the conversation, because if one in the 99th percentile is required, I need to scoot!
Owlice is just being modest, Michael.StarstruckKid wrote:owlice, many people and forces in this world will try to convince you that your intelligence doesn't measure up. Never believe them,owlice wrote:
Let's leave intelligence out of this, please, so I can take part in the conversation,
because if one in the 99th percentile is required, I need to scoot!
and never put yourself down. Odds are, you're smarter than you think you are, or you wouldn't be hanging out here!
That's too deep for me, StarstruckKid.StarstruckKid wrote:
Ok, Mad Magazine Man, what cowboy had a still from one of his movies, holding a pair of six-guns on a pair of scruffy outlaws, with the caption "You fellas are gonna stand here while I sing my song", in the aforementioned rag?
I think that there are more people that search the Asterisk than many are aware of. Some for the nice pictures in Apod - some for the scientific aspects that are presented here and some for the antics that sometimes occur between those who post here.neufer wrote:That's too deep for me, StarstruckKid.StarstruckKid wrote:
Ok, Mad Magazine Man, what cowboy had a still from one of his movies, holding a pair of six-guns on a pair of scruffy outlaws, with the caption "You fellas are gonna stand here while I sing my song", in the aforementioned rag?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singing_cowboy
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Mw9F5zawRQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HdlYVKBUVE
You got it! Now everybody else knows what we were doing in the back of that boring sixth-grade classroom.beyond wrote:Starstruckkid; would the guy holding a pair of six-guns on a couple of scruffy out laws be Gene Autry?...
Why risk quoting a fool, when I can quote myself and be certain of it? <== On re-reading: that's aimed at me, not anybody elseStarstruckKid wrote:...I might have stuck around had I found that straight answer I was looking for, but someone would have had to take the time, and assume some newbie would appreciate it, for that to happen.
It's certainly true that BAUT etc have a lot of dedicated followers, few of whom would 'jump ship', so to speak. Too, few of those followers have enough spare time to become regulars here also.RJN wrote:Although biased, I find myself really liking the redesign of the Asterisk. For one thing, it just makes the forum more fun to browse -- for me, anyway. For another, I think it is a better voluntary support mechanism for APOD. Next, another plus in my book is that the Asterisk is now more geared toward discussing current space events and images, and less geared toward discussing people's own speculative theories. Perhaps the Asterisk now leads the web in "rapid topicality" in space items, being much faster and broader, for example, than APOD can be.
Perhaps such thoughts are egoistical, but I do wonder why the newly redesigned Asterisk has not become more popular than it is. The main "trunk" link from the APOD front page is creating at a trickle of prospective new members to browse the greater board every day, but very few of them are staying past their initial foray. Why not?
Tuesday's APOD (2010 February 23) mentioned and pointed right at the Asterisk which gave me another angle to see how "the public" might view the new Asterisk. The main discussion link was popular (over 5000 views) and did lead to a very interesting discussion of those strange air ripples, the deepest scientific discussion of the ripples of which I am aware. Still, given the Asterisk attendance numbers today, few have stuck around to contribute images or social bookmarks, or even browse those posted by bystander and others. Why not?
Are people today already committed to their own social networking sites? Are those who follow the BAUT forum, the space.com forum, Facebook discussions, or leave comments on Bad Astronomy, etc., already committed there and have little want for "yet another astronomy forum?" Or is our discussion too technical so that the average browser feels too intimidated to post? Or is it that the Asterisk doesn't carry the "NASA brand" that APOD does?
Now as I said before, I enjoy the Asterisk just as it is and do not need to see it change at all (beyond minor updates, topical updates, and continued spam removal). Since becoming more active again, I see better and feel closer to the established board members who have been here for many years. Nevertheless, a forum with perhaps twice the current active members might make the Asterisk even more vibrant and interesting for everyone. Any thoughts on how to get there?
- RJN
Hope you don't mind me butting in here. I hadn't known about BAUT before it was mentioned here, so I just spent an hour having a look around. I'll definitely be going back, mostly because of the specific different sub-forums but also because of the general level of discussion. (There's much less of the I'm really funny so I'm going to make a joke in every thread attitude that is unfortunately rife here on the good ship Asterisk.) But while I was there I failed to notice any advertising. There may have been some but it just wasn't intrusive enough to come to my attention. Perhaps they dropped the ads?RJN wrote:... You might be interested to hear that years ago there was talk of combining the Asterisk into BAUT. Unfortunately, a major stumbling block on my end was that the BAUT forum is commercial (they run advertisements), and I was reluctant to have APOD's main discussion board be commercial. ...
rstevenson wrote:
I hadn't known about BAUT before it was mentioned here, so I just spent an hour having a look around. I'll definitely be going back, mostly because of the specific different sub-forums but also because of the general level of discussion. (There's much less of the I'm really funny so I'm going to make a joke in every thread attitude that is unfortunately rife here on the good ship Asterisk.)
http://www.ibiblio.org/wm/paint/auth/bosch/fools/ wrote:_The Ship of Fools_ by Hieronymus Boschc. 1490-1500; Oil on wood, 58 x 33 cm;In The Ship of Fools Bosch is imagining that the whole of mankind is voyaging through the seas of time on a ship, a small ship, that is representative of humanity. Sadly, every one of the representatives is a fool. This is how we live, says Bosch--we eat, drink, flirt, cheat, play silly games, pursue unattainable objectives. Meanwhile our ship drifts aimlessly and we never reach the harbour. The fools are not the irreligious, since promiment among them are a monk and a nun, but they are all those who live "in stupidity." Bosch laughs, and it is sad laugh. Which one of us does not sail in the wretched discomfort of the ship of human folly? Eccentric and secret genius that he was, Bosch not only moved the heart but scandalized it into full awareness. The sinister and monstrous things that he brought forth are the hidden creatures of our inward self-love: he externalizes the ugliness within, and so his misshapen demons have an effect beyond curiosity. We feel a hateful kinship with them. The Ship of Fools is not about other people, it is about us.
Musee du Louvre, Paris Illustrated allegories
BAUT is a combined blog for two excellent commercial sites:rstevenson wrote:I failed to notice any advertising.RJN wrote:
... You might be interested to hear that years ago there was talk of combining the Asterisk into BAUT. Unfortunately, a major stumbling block on my end was that the BAUT forum is commercial (they run advertisements), and I was reluctant to have APOD's main discussion board be commercial. ...
There may have been some but it just wasn't intrusive enough to come to my attention.
Perhaps they dropped the ads?
This is the case on every forum I've been on (which have not been astronomy/science forums)... except Asterisk. EVERY forum I've been on has had more posts in the yak-about-anything areas than on the subject board(s)!Interestingly, most discussion fora, even highly focussed ones, have 'Just Chat'/'Shoot the Breeze'/etc sections, which may end up with more posts & views than the 'serious' part of the forum!