| |
|
Article: <5dni21$c2k@dfw-ixnews7.ix.netcom.com>
From: saquo@ix.netcom.com(Nancy )
Subject: Re: HALE-BOPP Pictures NOW?
Date: 10 Feb 1997 16:23:29 GMT
In article <5dd7p0$lp5@nntp1.u.washington.edu> Lamont
Granquist writes:
> saquo@ix.netcom.com(Nancy ) writes:
>> Lamont, missing the point repeatedly. Skip's point was
that
>> THE OFFICIAL FUNNEL FOR INFORMATION WAS
>> BEING NARROWED TO RON BAALKE! This is a
>> common technique when damage control is the issue.
>
> It's also a common technique when one doesn't want to waste
> time reinventing the wheel.
>
>> Lamont, missing the point again. Skip's point was that
JPL IS
>> TURNING THEIR BACK ON WEBBING HALE-BOPP JUST
>> AS ITS SUPPOSED TO GO BANANAS.
>
> Ron is doing the exhaustive cataloging of submitted HB
images.
> Why should JPL repeat this?
> lamontg@nospam.washington.edu
Yet JPL was happy to reinvent the wheel for the first 19 months of the Hale-Bopp fraud. NOW they decide not to reinvent the wheel, just as it's supposed to become a blazing glory covering 1/3 of the sky?
In article <5dd7p0$lp5@nntp1.u.washington.edu> Lamont
Granquist writes:
>> Lamont, in article
<5d15af$rvh@nntp1.u.washington.edu>,
>> chooses to pick on an irrelevant issue, an issue not
even
>> mentioned - copyrights!
>
> It isn't irrelevant. .. I think that being careful of
copyrights is
> entirely relevant since it means that each photos origins
needs to
> be documented and the author's permission explicitly
granted...
> lamontg@nospam.washington.edu
They COME to him with this documentation! What takes time is making sure a photo falls in line with the official look that Hale-Bopp is supposed to have at the time the photo was taken. If it doesn't, then all those creative excuses have to be thought up. THAT'S what takes time!