Return to Home Page
> >What I received was from
> >Aaron only, and I don't want to think this represents the AAVSO's
> >decision.
>
> This is absolutely correct. What I requested from Mr. Kato was to
> remove my "personal e-mail address" from his recipient list. He
> refused to do so and tried to turn it into a debate about whether or
> not VSNET publications should be routinely posted to the AAVSO
> Discussion Group. I refuse to enter that debate as it is out of my
> jurisdiction and irrelevant to my request, which was simply to leave
> me off his lists.
This statement is very interesting. I sent a "special version" of
the "News from VSNET" to Aaron with an explicit explanation to ask for
relaying it to the AAVSO members (a copy also sent to Janet). I regarded
this as a "request" to the representative technical assistant of the AAVSO,
while Aaron replied "stop sending me any VSNET materials", in spite of
the fact that I again explained that it was my request to circulate the
information and call for observations to the AAVSO members (as is clear
from my posting, it was not necessarily meant to be routinely published
in the AAVSO discussion -- although a number of people have expressed
that it would be a better and pratical way than other thinkable
possibilities). Aaron insisted as if "we are making a debate whether or
not VSNET publications should be routinely posted to the AAVSO Discussion
Group", but the truth was not, as shown above.
Aaron also used a phrase that "it has been decided" as if the AAVSO
has made a formal decision. This is why I requested formal words of
decision why the AAVSO does not accept any VSNET materials, I haven't
heard anything from Aaron about this, but he replied that he automatically
refuses future e-mails from me. A channel for discussion having been
automatically blocked, I have been obliged to make a sad news here.
From these intances we have learned the following. Please remind them
in future communications with the internet representative of the AAVSO:
(1) Even if Aaron used a phrase as if something is "already decided",
this does not necessarily mean something is decided by the AAVSO; the
decision maker may have been Aaron himself, and he may not be aware of
the importance who made a decision.
(2) Formal scientific requests can be automatically rejected, if they
go to Aaron. I have never been advised by Aaron for an alternative way,
but they can be simply blocked by his decision only. Such things should
not happen in an organization, which is responsible for the entire
community of relevant science.
-----
...
Even during this time, "the golden times" of transient objects of
timely interest are passing away, and the pure AAVSO observers are
deprivied of opportunity to record the most interesting stage of
astronomy -- I must regard it a loss to astronomy. And to my regret,
some of the members, who are also the members of the AAVSO, contributed
to the study of these most important phenomena with a world professional
astronomer group, but the rest of the AAVSO members are effectively
averted from the feats they have accomplished -- this is sad to the
AAVSO, too. What most saddens me was that such an important decision
was made only privately, regardless of the official AAVSO decision.
Regards,
Taichi Kato
Return to the Powerful Daisaku
vsnet-adm@kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp
