#Geo conference
6 messages in this thread
Hi, folks–
The time is approaching for the 7th quarterly geo-conference in this forum.
Some date/times we might use are: Sunday, March 27 at 1 PM Pacific time Sunday,
April 3 (Easter) at 1 PM Pacific time Sunday, April 10 at 1 PM Pacific time
Who out there is likely to attend? Which of these times are suitable for each
of you, and which are not? We are by no means limited to Sundays at 1 PM; that
is simply the pattern that has suited the most attendees in the past. If you
would like to see another time, please mention it; others may like the idea.
Is there any particular topic people would like to see as a lead subject?
In these conferences, any geo-science/rockhounding topic will be welcome,
considering that past conferences have discussed topics including Beakman's
World, Oregon thundereggs, natural nuclear reactors, hazardous (to your wealth)
Franklin mineral dealers, Bancroft minerals, carbonatites, CCD imaging of
specimens, and many more.
To give some idea what past conferences were like, there are transcripts of the
3rd and 6th conferences in this forum's library, files GCON3.ARC and GCON6.ARC.
A conference in a CIS forum is sort of like a conference phone call, but more
easily set up, and everyone "talks" by typing. I was interested to read
recently a number of corporations have been using a typing conference for
meetings even where the people were all face to face, with talking forbidden! I
imagine it is because the conference can split into several threads without
people being unable to hear some of the side-conversations, and because no one
is "silenced" by an interruption, yet the would-be interrupter can "strike
while the iron is hot" also. The corporate meetings also employ anonymity,
which is typically not used in forum conferences; anonymity leaves ideas to be
considered only on their own merits and adds a freedom to bring forward "silly"
ideas that may spark serious ideas.
–Doug
No special preference here. Yet. I plan to attend.
Thx, Guy
Doug, any of those times are good for me. I got some free time on DELPHI and if
I like their service better I may switch to them however. Right now I am paying
an additional $15.00 per month on top of the basic $9.00 just to be part of the
GEOLOGY forum. I have no interest in all the other services labelled under this
so called "Executive Option" and DELPHI seems to have a much more flexible
pricing policy based on actual usage. This is better than loading a whole group
of services under one option, the lions share of which I don't access anyway.
In addition I would like to use the CB channels from time to time but the $25
monthy flat fee and $4.80 hr on top of this, is outragous and prevents me from
doing so. No way I am going to write a check to Compuserve ever month for $45
plus !
Hi, Todd–
Are you finding many rockhounds on the Internet other than the
rocks-and-fossils list?
If you are spending an extra $15/month on this forum, you may not be using CIS
efficiently (I assume you are not calling international long distance or some
such thing).
I am fuzzy on why you mention the "executive option"; I do not use it either.
Are you doing all your reading and writing of forum messages off-line? With
CIM you can use a cycle: (1) read forum messages in your filing cabinet,
replying and writing new ones, which you place in your out basket, (2) enter
the forum and send all out basket messages, (3) browse this section's message
list, "mark" any topics of interest, and (4) "Retrieve marked messages" with a
"Disconnect on Completion" option, and after going off-line, returning to (1).
That is semi-automated; a fully-automated CIS access program like OzCIS (which
I use), TAPCIS, Navigator, or others can do the whole on-line visit at machine
speed, eliminating all operator delays from the visit. I do not recommend them
for newcomers, but once you are familiar with CIS and forums, they bear looking
at.
Either way, I most often spend less than one minute on each visit to the forum
at 2400 bps, making two visits in a given day (the "first pass" is mostly
reading in all the messages in this section, and getting a topic list for the
other sections, the "second pass" is mostly dropping off my responses and
picking up selected topics in other sections). That is less than an hour a
month, under $5 at 2400 on the standard pricing plan. On the alternate plan,
that would go up to $13, but would save $8.95-2.50 on the monthly fee, which
might make sense for a very-heavy CISmail user with no interest in basic
services, but not most people.
Note that at a higher modem speeds, that would still be under a minute; since
the price is charged in 1-minute increments, with a higher minute price for
higher-than-2400 speeds, that would actually cost more, unless you visit less
often, or are taking in several extended services in a pass, so there is more
to read. Even then, a higher modem speed may not pay, as CIS's own reaction
speeds are not increased as you shift from forum to forum or whatever.
Thus for short passes, higher modem speeds than 2400 bps often are not
economically efficient, but if you are downloading some large files, higher
speeds generally do save money and time. Some experimenting may be in order!
The recent PC magazine article on CIS and competitors (CIS was "Editor's
choice") mentioned CIS will soon be supplying wider access to the Internet
(later this year was mentioned, though it was not clear how official that was).
–Doug
Doug – My preference is for the Mar 29th date, but the Appril dates are Ok.
Possible topics : Land Access legislation pending (Bacus Bill and others),
Establishing a clearing house for requested information from harder to find
references that most (many) members may not have but some do, display methods
at home and at shows for fossil, lapidary, mineral specimens etc.
I have posted a partial bibliography of paleo references I have at home and am
willing to do searches for any info that someone else may need. I will be
posting a bibliography of other earth science related references soon. With a
minimal amount of effort, and relatively low cost (v Iquest searches), the
forum could provide a lot of info for the members.
Another discussion idea would be to begin drafting feasibility and design
consideration of a first class mineral database. Given the broad range of
experience, computer hardware and software, collections and computer knowledge
that several of us have, development could be a reality. But it would take
committment and effort, as you, Jerry, and Lanny undoubtably know.
Well, those are a few ideas for you to gnaw on.
Michael
Hi, Michael–
Your bibliography is certainly welcome.
As my recent upload of my Scientific American index (SCIAM.ARC) in this
library's forum shows, I firmly believe in cheap magazine references. If I had
to pay Iquest every time I went hunting for Sci Am articles, I surely would be
broke, and I like having it in my laptop when connecting is impractical. If we
can get more people to index assorted magazines (perhaps the magazine staffers
themselves), this could become a powerful resource.
Who out there favors which of Michael's subject suggestions?
–Doug