Author Topic: The new TAC is getting old  (Read 11822 times)

Lumpy Darkness

  • Guest
Re: The new TAC is getting old
« Reply #15 on: March 19, 2015, 01:37:03 PM »
So, what exactly are "TAC" organized events these days?

That's precisely what I'm saying, Peter.  TAC needs to get back into the business of publicizing and promoting.  There are plenty of highly experienced observers who have the knowledge to do this.  Look at Jamie, he just posted about Dino.  Kudos Jamie!  I'm in, on 3rd Q.  Remember when we'd go both on 3rdQ and NM?

Quote
Wouldn't it be better to consolidate TAC's efforts with SC and SJ rather than remain independent?

You can join and participate.

SC lost their darkish sky site.  Bonny Doon was good when the fog was in.  Otherwise, nah.  SJ takes its members to a sink hole (dew trap) downhill from Coe.  In the light dome of the Gilroy Outlet Mall... way too bright, but noobs don't know the diff.  We can show them the difference another 20 minutes up the mountain makes.  And, I know there's plenty of folks who just don't want clubs because of the politics... dues, by-laws, all to go to club sites that they don't own (generally speaking) and can easily have access revoked.  TAC is not so constrained, free to everyone, and can move quickly.

I'll stay with trying to revitalize TAC.  I've had enough of club's (seen from way inside) - although I may pay dues to SFAA to support their lectures, I may even go to their City Star Parties which are effectively sidewalk astronomy.  Don't even need to be a member to do that.

I hope I don't come off detesting club crap as much as I actually do ;-)


pnatscher

  • Observer
  • Posts: 105
    • View Profile
Re: The new TAC is getting old
« Reply #16 on: March 19, 2015, 02:41:18 PM »
Mark, this club 'crap' as you phrase comes off strange since you have been a Director for SJAA numerous times storming out in the interim ;))  Supporting established organizations pays dividends to the general pubic as they attract more people and offer much more choices.  You gets what you pay for -- there's no free lunch.  I think paying something is honorable, and responsible socially, as I detest free riders.  Somebody is paying for your free use of the sites you refer to as "free."  Doesn't SJAA also use Coe, and didn't they initially negotiate it use for astronomy?  I hope SC can find another good site again.  I enjoy that "club."

Lumpy Darkness

  • Guest
Re: The new TAC is getting old
« Reply #17 on: March 19, 2015, 02:51:42 PM »
I'm not the only ex club president/board member that wants nothing to do with their old club anymore.  PAS had a similar situation recently.  In fact, SJAA has a rich history of that occurring - at least 3 of the 4 last club presidents left the club!  (*Edit: Its 4 of the last 5 prior to the new one, want nothing to do with it).  It all has to do with politics, which is why I left.  Once that begins, I have zero interest, its supposed to be fun, not bs.

Clubs do some good things, I do enjoy the high level of speakers the SFAA gets.  As I said, I may join to support that.  But I'm not going to go to their dark sky star parties, which are on Mount Tam.  Sky is too bright there for me.  Same with SJAA, their sites are too bright.

TAC had contacted Coe for many years to reserve the overflow lot for astronomy.  Jim Van Nuland with the SJAA has been doing that for ages, for the benefit of the entire astronomy community.  People would show up at Coe expecting an SJAA star party there, and find nobody!

I'd prefer the unaffiliated approach, more of a wider community, if we can bring that back.  If we can, great! If we can't, I can still observe.

Mark, this club 'crap' as you phrase comes off strange since you have been a Director for SJAA numerous times storming out in the interim ;))  Supporting established organizations pays dividends to the general pubic as they attract more people and offer much more choices.  You gets what you pay for -- there's no free lunch.  I think paying something is honorable, and responsible socially, as I detest free riders.  Somebody is paying for your free use of the sites you refer to as "free."  Doesn't SJAA also use Coe, and didn't they initially negotiate it use for astronomy?  I hope SC can find another good site again.  I enjoy that "club."

pnatscher

  • Observer
  • Posts: 105
    • View Profile
Re: The new TAC is getting old
« Reply #18 on: March 19, 2015, 03:06:36 PM »
I was told the SJAA has an interest in purchasing a remote dark site property for its use and they have the funds to do that.  If SJAA can't promote Coe with over 300 members, then who can?  At SJAA, did you promote the darker sites of Coe and FP while you were Pres. ??? Newbies are more interested in being closer in to enjoy their new astro-hobbies and not traveling to Coe or Fremont Peak, yet.  They have long work schedules and new families to deal with.  Rancho may be bright but it works for them.  We all may have started that way -- I did in the NYC area.  I think beginners are better off starting out with a club like SJAA to feel all the possibilities at that early stage.  That's why TAC did so well with the experience crowd.  It's time to start over with a new group since there's a huge gap in age groups.

Lumpy Darkness

  • Guest
Re: The new TAC is getting old
« Reply #19 on: March 19, 2015, 03:17:37 PM »

This part of our discussion began when you suggested melding TAC into SJAA.  I've said why I (personally) wasn't interested.  4 of 5 past presidents not liking how it works says enough.

When I was president, I focused primarily on trying to have the club meet its 501(c)3 non-profit goals, public education.  That meant activities primarily at Houge Park, and the great school star party program that Jim Van Nuland has been almost autonomously been running for the club for over 20 years.  The opportunity to purchase land for and observing site did present itself, but my vision was for SJAA to be part of a consortium of clubs owning the property, along with unaffiliated observers (paying a dues fee), to support the ongoing costs of ownership.  The SJAA board later decided they weren't interested.

Newbies do get a good intro to astronomy at Houge Park, on 1st Q moon nights, and 3rd Q for bright targets and planets.  The club reports to the City of San Jose, which looks at what percentage of activities support SJ residents, since the club uses the park and hall for free.  The Park and Rec department uses the statistics to justify the free use to the bean counters and City Counselors.  That's why, for my 2 years (we passed a term limit while I was pres) I focused on SJ/Houge Park activities.

I still love the idea of a consortium ownership of an observing site.

BTW... I also started with a club, SJAA, but left it in the mid-90's due to... ..... .... nasty politics.  I returned when that particular board was completely gone.

I was told the SJAA has an interest in purchasing a remote dark site property for its use and they have the funds to do that.  If SJAA can't promote Coe with over 300 members, then who can?  At SJAA, did you promote the darker sites of Coe and FP while you were Pres. ??? Newbies are more interested in being closer in to enjoy their new astro-hobbies and not traveling to Coe or Fremont Peak, yet.  They have long work schedules and new families to deal with.  Rancho may be bright but it works for them.  We all may have started that way -- I did in the NYC area.  I think beginners are better off starting out with a club like SJAA to feel all the possibilities at that early stage.  That's why TAC did so well with the experience crowd.  It's time to start over with a new group since there's a huge gap in age groups.

RalphWaid

  • Observer
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: The new TAC is getting old
« Reply #20 on: July 11, 2015, 10:33:33 PM »
I agree with RBA. Since merging participation has dropped off a cliff. I have even been side lined as well.

Stephen Winston

  • Observer
  • Posts: 11
    • View Profile
Re: The new TAC is getting old
« Reply #21 on: July 13, 2015, 08:27:27 PM »
Let me add my vote for bringing back the email list.  I miss the banter, even if I didn't participate enough.  If we can bring back the email lists I promise to do better ;).

Marko

  • Administrator
  • Observer
  • *****
  • Posts: 112
    • View Profile
    • Marko's Astronomy Site
Re: The new TAC is getting old
« Reply #22 on: July 14, 2015, 12:38:00 PM »
Just so people realize what an email list would be it would be good to know how many people would be ok with the email list taking the form of a Google group or perhaps Yahoo group.   I think there are those that dislike the big internet or rather perceived 'big brother' aspect of Google groups but realistically they already 'got your number' anyway is my view.  I use Google groups for a few things and it is as close to an email list as can be had with the added advantage as you also have a web only experience if that is your wish.

You can operate in an email only mode on such a group and just do reply OR visit the webpage and start new thread.  Several links appear on each email so you can hit one to go directly to webpage interface easily to see other threads and so on.   

I love the ease of use frankly.  Best of both worlds.
« Last Edit: July 14, 2015, 12:44:07 PM by Marko »
Let me roam the deep skies and I'll be content.

Enrico

  • Observer
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: The new TAC is getting old
« Reply #23 on: December 28, 2015, 11:32:02 AM »