A couple of Announcements.

BobHegwood · Post #1by **BobHegwood** » 07.12.2007, 14:39

Hey there all. Just wanted to let you know that I am now trying
very much to help Ulrich with the Motherlode, so processing time
should start to improve very shortly.

Ulrich is teaching me what I need to know in order to help, and the
first thing I'm doing is updating add-on descriptions and screen shots.

If you have a screen shot you'd like to change, I can assure you that
it will be dealt with on a daily basis now. As I get the hang of what
I'm doing on the ML, we'll be getting better at quick responses for
everything.

I have also created a new (but very meager right now) web site, and
you can view it at:

http://home.woh.rr.com/bhegwood/

Again, it ain't much yet, but I'll be adding new files here and on
the Motherlode, as I get the time.

Hope this meets with your approval.

Thanks, Bob

mikej · Post #2by **mikej** » 11.12.2007, 06:31

Hey Bob!
From someone who has enjoyed your posts and is probably more brain dead than you!!! I am adding your site to my favorites and have high hopes!

Michael

BobHegwood · Post #3by **BobHegwood** » 11.12.2007, 07:03

Appreciate the comments, Michael...

Give me some time here though. I'm getting a real workout on the
Motherlode right now, and I'm also updating my web site, and trying
to create some new scripts. Whew!

Then too, I simply cannot keep my mouth shut on the forums either,
so THAT takes up some time too. :lol:

Take care, Bob

Fenerit · Post #4by **Fenerit** » 11.12.2007, 17:35

Well done, Bob. If you see a crazy man which attempt to connect the FTP without success, am I that did to try my f@#]*^g connection up.

BobHegwood · Post #5by **BobHegwood** » 11.12.2007, 18:42

Fenerit wrote:Well done, Bob. If you see a crazy man which attempt to connect the FTP without success, am I that did to try my f@#]*^g connection up.

And why would you need FTP?

Just curious. :wink:

I have tried to make the site as SIMPLE as possible. When I do have
downloads, they will be accessible via browser. Just FYI. If you want
anything else on the site, just right-click and save. :roll:

That's alright though... I *like* crazy people.

Thanks, Bob

Fenerit · Post #6by **Fenerit** » 11.12.2007, 19:09

To upload files over the HTTP allowance... Nor just to download. :wink:

BobHegwood · Post #7by **BobHegwood** » 11.12.2007, 20:51

Fenerit wrote:To upload files over the HTTP allowance... Nor just to download.

Gotcha!

Cham · Post #8by **Cham** » 12.12.2007, 23:40

Bob,

just to let you know that I appreciate your work on the Motherlode. I'm starting to feel a difference.

Also, I encourage you to be crittic towards the new addons (and maybe to make some cleaning in the old ones too). Please, rise up the quality !

As a start, please trash my own *old* addon called "Fictious Nebulae" and my old shity model called "Luna 1". This model is really just a piece of trash anyway and I wonder why I published it in the first place ! :oops:

BobHegwood · Post #9by **BobHegwood** » 13.12.2007, 00:55

Cham wrote:Bob,

just to let you know that I appreciate your work on the Motherlode. I'm starting to feel a difference.

Also, I encourage you to be crittic towards the new addons (and maybe to make some cleaning in the old ones too). Please, rise up the quality !

As a start, please trash my own *old* addon called "Fictious Nebulae" and my old shity model called "Luna 1". This model is really just a piece of trash anyway and I wonder why I published it in the first place !

Okay, Martin, a couple of things here...

First off, I have absolutely NO control of when or how add-ons get
posted to the site. That is strictly Ulrich's domain right now.

2nd, I AM working in the spacecraft category right now and I AM
trashing some of these add-ons. My criteria depends on whether
the average user can install the thing, and whether or not the
add-on contains blatant errors - or is simply redundant. I am also
trying to determine if the add-on is realistic or fantasy, and THAT
is now playing a role in deletions.

If you don't mind though, I would very much like to keep the Luna
1 model since we have nothing to replace it yet. Would you care
to upload a revised version? Also, what you guys don't see is that
a number of people still use the older versions of Celestia, and
they have nothing they can use for a particular add-on if it is not
in a simple 3ds format. I KNOW that doesn't make much sense,
but some folks (Like myself before my PC upgrade) simply couldn't
handle the largess (if you will) of the newer versions of Celestia.

I am almost finished with the spacecraft category now, and I'll
take a look at the "Fictitious Nebula" just as soon as I get
finished with the current category. Please keep in mind that I am
having to download, install and TEST every add-on that I lay
hands on, so that's why it's taking me a little while to get around
to other sections.

If you still insist, I would be happy to delete the nebula tonight.
Please respond before I do this though, and let me know if we
can keep the Luna 1. This is, after all, YOUR add-on, and if you
don't want it there, then it's gone. :wink:

Cham · Post #10by **Cham** » 13.12.2007, 01:16

Bob, you may keep the Luna 1 if you wish, but I sincerely think this is a "bad" model. It's simply too simplistic, too approximate to be interesting in Celestia. It's not even beautifull to look at. Even its SSC is false, since we currently don't know where in the solar system that probe is right now ! So what gives ? Do wathever you prefer with it, but I suggest to trash it, just to increase *a bit* the overall quality of the site. Same thing for the fictious nebulea, especially since they are ... well, fictious anyway.

BobHegwood · Post #11by **BobHegwood** » 13.12.2007, 01:21

Cham wrote:Bob, you may keep the Luna 1 if you wish, but I sincerely think this is a "bad" model. It's simply too simplistic, too approximate to be interesting in Celestia. It's not even beautifull to look at. Even its SSC is false, since we currently don't know where in the solar system that probe is right now ! So what gives ? Do wathever you prefer with it, but I suggest to trash it, just to increase *a bit* the overall quality of the site. Same thing for the fictious nebulea, especially since they are ... well, fictious anyway.

Okey-Dokey my friend, you've got it...

I will rush over to the ML in a few minutes and DELETE both of these
add-ons. Your wish is my command. :wink:

Thanks, Bob

Cham · Post #12by **Cham** » 13.12.2007, 01:25

Thanks, Bob.

BobHegwood · Post #13by **BobHegwood** » 13.12.2007, 01:31

They are already GONE, my friend...

Ask? And ye shall receive. :wink:

Thanks, Brain-Dead

rthorvald · Post #14by **rthorvald** » 13.12.2007, 09:17

BobHegwood wrote:I am almost finished with the spacecraft category now, and I'll
take a look at the "Fictitious Nebula" just as soon as I get
finished with the current category. Please keep in mind that I am
having to download, install and TEST every add-on that I lay
hands on, so that's why it's taking me a little while to get around
to other sections.

Wow,
That is quite a task. Thank you for doing it!
And, since you *are*, please keep the garbage detector on max... It can finally get the ML into usable shape!

If you don??t want to delete "borderline" works, maybe one could create a "junkyard" folder in the Creators dir and keep such material there until it is obvious nobody downloads it anymore (the stats will show that).

Also, just to bring back a debate from the beginning of it all, it *still* nags me that the "fictional" category is not labelled "fan art". But nobody agreed with me then, so why should they now...

Anyhow,
Thanks again! (To Ulrich too, of course, for keeping it running for three years!).

- rthorvald

Adirondack · Post #15by **Adirondack** » 13.12.2007, 13:04

FYI:
Beside Bob's renovation task, I will browse the catalogs soon to delete add-ons that are
rated as "bad" with an explanation from more than two people why the add-on is bad.

Adirondack

ajtribick · Post #16by **ajtribick** » 13.12.2007, 13:20

rthorvald wrote:Also, just to bring back a debate from the beginning of it all, it *still* nags me that the "fictional" category is not labelled "fan art". But nobody agreed with me then, so why should they now...

Hmm... most of the categories in the fictional section are "fan art" categories, but not all fictional stuff is fan art. If I decide to create my own fictional system, not based on any pre-existing works (such as Star Wars, etc.), then it is not fan art, surely.

BobHegwood · Post #17by **BobHegwood** » 13.12.2007, 13:56

chaos syndrome wrote:Hmm... most of the categories in the fictional section are "fan art" categories, but not all fictional stuff is fan art. If I decide to create my own fictional system, not based on any pre-existing works (such as Star Wars, etc.), then it is not fan art, surely.

Makes absolutely No difference to me personally, but Ulrich is still
the MAN, so you'll have to take that up with him I'm afraid. :wink:

Adirondack · Post #18by **Adirondack** » 13.12.2007, 14:47

rthorvald wrote:... maybe one could create a "junkyard" folder in the Creators dir and keep such material there until it is obvious nobody downloads it anymore (the stats will show that).

That sounds reasonable to me. But real garbage should be deleted.

rthorvald wrote:Also, just to bring back a debate from the beginning of it all, it *still* nags me that the "fictional" category is not labelled "fan art". But nobody agreed with me then, so why should they now...

Runar, why do you say "why should they now..."?
You are still a volunteer of the CML and we can restart this discussion on the mailing list.
Though I don't know the former discussion about this issue we can think it over with the
other "background" volunteers.
But I'm not sure whether it is so much important to call it "fictional" or "fan art".
What about "Fictional & Fan Art"?
I do agree with chaos syndrome and Bob here. Please describe your objections on the
mailing list since the forum is the wrong place for that.

Adirondack

rthorvald · Post #19by **rthorvald** » 13.12.2007, 16:39

Adirondack wrote:Please describe your objections on the
mailing list since the forum is the wrong place for that.

Ok, you are right. But just to clarify, for Chaos??comment:
I meant that since Celestia is an astronomy simulator, all the fictions are Celestia fan art, not, for example, ST or SW or any other external fan art type, though they can be that too.

- rthorvald

fsgregs · Post #20by **fsgregs** » 15.12.2007, 21:31

Just a short comment, and apparently too late since you've already dumped the add-on (bummer!!), but Cham's fictitious nebula had some real value. They were diffuse nebula that one could load anywhere and fly through from one side to another, from any direction. In that regard, they were great for creating fictional systems that might be of artistic or educational interest.

For example, I used the nebula to surround a neutron star, which I embedded inside the nebula, so I could explain to educational readers that neutron stars form as the core of exploding supernova, and over time, the gases of that supernova spread out into a diffuse wispy nebula, while the central neutron star may remain behind.

I for one am sorry to see the nebula go!

FYI

Frank