Rocketry Planet

PLEASE DON'T START A STAMPEDE OR KILL EACH OTHER TRYING TO JUMP THE LINE, but would someone please tell me what I am doing wrong? I know there are plenty of takers that would love the opportunity to tell me where to get off, but I think I must be losing touch with reality here. After all, it wasn't that many years ago when I discovered hobby rocketry on the Internet and founded a similar hobby rocketry portal.

But something has changed. Something is not quite right. Suddenly, this is not your father's rocketry hobby. And I don't think that something is me. I think I am pretty much the same person I was 10 year ago, plowing new ground in my attempt to expand the enjoyment of hobby rocketry, but I may very well be wrong. If so, please, take the opportunity to let me have it right between the eyes and then, can we please move on?

When I first discovered that the hobby of model rocketry that I had enjoyed as a teenager had grown up to become high power rocketry, I was as daft as a kid in a candy store, running from this web site to that web site to another, trying to read and learn as much as I could about the hobby we all know and love. In all that running around, it occurred to me that the amount of information about the hobby was seriously diverse and extremely separated to the far corners of the world, and tracking down up-to-date information took some doing to accomplish.

Why, if we had a central point of aggregation that pooled all of that information and presented it in a simple to use, comprehensive format, wouldn't that be wonderful? Why yes it would, and it was. I still remember the early days of my project, building relationships with manufacturers and vendors, farming information and new product announcements from these contacts, and assembling it into a central point of distribution.

Granted, back then, other than web sites and email, the only online discussion forum format was the Compuserve Rocketry Forum operated by Doug Pratt of Pratt Hobbies, and together with the UseNET newsgroup rec.models.rockets, that was the extent of forum-based messaging on the hobby. But no matter where I posted that freshly aggregated product news and information, it was accepted with an appreciative reader response from people who were as hungry as I was for hobby specific, up-to-date information about the companies that serviced our small niche and the products that they offered.

Fast forward 10 years and the world has truly become a different place. In 10 years I have noticed many things that have crept into society, including an elevated level of fear brought on by the world-wide threat of terrorism, a reduction in common courtesy and compassion and a near non-existence of decency toward people trying to help. Basically, the online world has turned into a rude experience. Is it terrorism? Is it the high cost of living? Is it world politics? Is it the ability to hide behind a keyboard, doing things you wouldn't do in person?

I still have the same passion for uplifting the sport of hobby rocketry to the outside world that I did 10 years ago, still believe a job worth doing is worth doing right, that our work is our signature. I believe in trying to put a professional face on this hobby and I work hard to promote that spirit with this web site. But for the life of me, I do not understand the reception that I have faced this time around. This trip, there is vehemence and hatred, sharp words and not-so-subtle insults. Where information was once welcomed, it is now categorically rejected. And I don't understand why.

One of the things I have always done for manufacturers is work with them to disseminate new product release information to the general public through the form of a press release. The process accomplished several things: it allowed a company who created products for the hobby an avenue to distribute information about their products, it gave them access to writing services if press release creation wasn't their forté, it allowed me to aggregate new product information and it gave my various points of distribution a constant flow of valued hobby information.  This is a good thing.

Most people don't have a problem with that within the constraints of the original distribution models I developed years ago, with the exception of the Compuserve Rocketry Forum, which is now defunct. The people who join the opt-in email distribution list I created signed up specifically for the purpose of receiving these messages, so they are as happy as pigs in slop. The readers of rec.models.rockets vote by silent acquiescence as long as you don't talk about bouncing lasers off the moon, UPC codes, bag thicknesses or sign your name as Brad Guth. But the new kids on the block? Man, have they been a pickle!

My first firefight involved a popular hobby rocketry forum. No matter what I posted there it was met with moderator resistance. TRA/NAR lawsuit articles were judged "too political," short one-paragraph previews of the same with links to the subject matter were called "self-promotion," vendor announcements were desirous "if they come from the originating vendor." Ok, I saw how that was going. Even though Rocketry Planet is in no way a parallel universe to that site, it was seen as competition.

The next time this occurred was on a national organization's private mailing list. Initially, the response was welcoming, but eventually it took a turn into the basement. The first spat was over a message that was judged a repost of a previous message and labeled "aimed at driving traffic to your website." What was eventually brought to light was that the post was an update on the TRA/NAR court case using a similar title, but what was the real problem here? Was there a fear of people immediately dropping their POP3 email connection in a sprint to leave the mailing list behind simply to run to Rocketry Planet? I just don't get it.

Another post on that list inviting fellow rocketeers to join their friends in a Rocketry Planet chat session coupled together with a webcast of the X Prize Cup event was deemed an "advertisement" for my "commercial venture." Excuse me, but an advertisement is usually considered a solicitation for one to purchase something from another, and the chat/webcast was free (as they still are). You could label Rocketry Planet as a "commercial venture" if you take away the fact that it is not structured as a 503(c) non-profit organization. But if someone wants to consider Rocketry Planet a "commercial venture," then I would not want that individual to ever be responsible for creating a viable business plan for anyone else.

Most certainly there are a number of banner advertisers here, but if you know anything about the advertising rate structure for the site, you know this is not a for-profit operation, let alone a profitable operation, not by a long shot. The rate structure is a low flat rate, there are no bonuses for spikes in traffic or extra click-throughs. I get the same miserly amount whether I am the sole visitor on the site or whether I host the Olympic Games on it. The advertisers here pay for the cost of operating the site and nothing more. No one short of a member of the Forbes 400 would be capable of re-imbursing me for the amount of time I put into this place every week and I know of no one who would be willing to make the sacrifices I am making, monetarily, to operate a site like this.

But still, these scenarios occurred on another web site and a private mailing list that someone individually was shelling out the bucks themselves to operate. By all considerations, they had the right to take the positions that they took and I can appreciate that. They were still in effect stifling the distribution of generic product information and news about the rocketry hobby, but they had that right. And I can live with their decisions.

But the latest episode has me completely baffled. Individuals, albeit just a small handful of people, have taken it upon themselves to sequester UseNET. UseNET, by its very nature, is an open messaging exchange system where users participate in the equivalent of open email distribution. According to Wikipedia, "Users read and post e-mail-like messages (called 'articles') to a number of distributed newsgroups, categories that resemble bulletin board systems in most respects."

UseNET is typically considered a free-for-all, even within the context of a newsgroup's field of interest, because it is an unmoderated format. There are a small number though that are moderated. Again referencing Wikipedia, "That means that messages submitted by readers are not distributed to UseNET, but instead are emailed to the moderators of the newsgroup, for approval. Moderated newsgroups have rules called charters. Moderators are persons whose job is to ensure that messages that the readers see in newsgroups conform to the charter of the newsgroup."

Without resorting to using moderation, a more recent UseNET newsgroup than rec.models.rockets was formed by fliers in another country to discuss hobby rocketry topics on a more regional basis. Nothing wrong with that. I am sure they still use AeroTech motors and build PML kits as well as the rest of the world right? Why, yes, they do. Well, certainly these individuals would want to know about the latest new product information, right? How wrong you are.

Rouse-Tech releases a new threaded forward closure and they complained because it wasn't a metric thread (even though it was a 38 millimeter closure!) Public Missiles announces a new line of threaded motor retainers and they reminded everyone to disregard the considerations of quality or economics, just "Buy British!" Sky Ripper clears their certification hurdle and, well, that's just a blatant advertisement (No offer to buy, just that it was now approved, yet it's still an "advertisement").

One message, the manufacturer got many of his facts incorrect, and while I corrected as many as I could and had knowledge of, an inaccuracy still got through. Solution? Kill the messenger. Bullet in the head. An invitation to join other Rocketry Planet members to view the Arianespace launch while chatting? Well, that's just a shameless plug to "join your website." So? It doesn't cost anything and you get to hang out with fellow rocketeers and chat while watching a launch. Is there something inherently sinister about that? I would expect that either nerve gas shoots out of the user's keyboard or their credit card information gets pilfered while they chat. 

I did read the newsgroup's charter (the newsgroup is unmoderated but still has a charter), and my posts were conformal in that they were all about pertinent hobby rocketry information and were all presented as professionally as was possible with the most accurate information I had available. It wasn't as if I were posting, as one of the group's readers did, miserably failing in his rebuttal attempt, press releases about rhododendrons. Everything was rejected categorically. Not one post of eleven was accepted in the manner it was intended. No manner of rationale was able to be taken from the ensuing exchanges, except that they were right and I was wrong. But unlike the first two scenarios, UseNET isn't owned by anyone! So is this how we treat others in this hobby today?

I just don't get it. Sometimes I wonder why I do this. Moreso, what possessed me to do it one more time? I am over 50 now, so perhaps my memory is worse than I thought. I am simply doing what I have always done, trying to spread the word about our hobby, communicate what's the latest and greatest, and suddenly I've got two heads and ten horns. At what point over the last ten years did this occur and no one bothered to tell me?

I just have one request: After you're done providing me with the answer to this mystery, could we all have a group hug and come to the realization that we are all on the same side here, and then, for God's sake, MOVE ON? I mean, life is simply too short for a continuation of this rubbish.

Darrell D. Mobley is the editor of Rocketry Planet. You may reach him by email at This email address is being protected from spam bots, you need Javascript enabled to view it . If you would like to comment publicly, post your response below.

Reader comments:

#1 What's going on

Darrell,

What ever is going on, I’m sure is perpetrated by just a few. The majority of rocketeers appreciate very much what you are doing for Rocketry. There will always be those that enjoy tearing down what another man has created. Just remember that they are few and those that back you are many. Rocketry Planet is a much-needed resource. It keeps me up to date on current events, and has a ton of information about the going on’s of rocketry.
Those just getting started in rocketry will find your site and realize what a gold mine they have discovered. Those established in rocketry use your site to keep current and to share new ideas or products. I wish 15 plus years ago Rocketry Planet was up and running. Back then rocket resources were very scarce and unless you knew someone already involved in rocketry, rocketry just didn’t exist. I would think that anyone in the hobby would welcome a resource such as yours who’s mission is to promote and inject a healthy awareness of rocketry to those just starting as well as keeping those established in this hobby abreast of what is currently going on and available.

Mick Kelly
TRA 2937

Mick Kelly on 03-10-2007 08:22 AM

#2

Darrell,

Don't get discouraged. I have read the posts. Chris B. and Chris E. seem to be having a bad day (maybe a bad life). As Mick said, they are part of a limited, but vocal, few. Don't stoop to their level.

One suggestion, if it is possible, would be to segregate your news releases by geography/demographic. In that case the number of items posted on the UK website would be both smaller, and arguably more relevant than what is posted on other Usenet sites. In addition, this would also better align with their limited amount of postings and thus the smaller number of postings by Rocketry Planet would not overwhelm or offend them, as the case may be. In either case though, I believe the Arianespace launch posting would be relevant to their site.

In closing, Darrell, you are providing a great service. As always, it does take time to change the habits of users. I encourage you to keep up the fine fight though. I personally would like to be doing more to cross reference Rocketry Planet in postings and encourage others to visit the site, but I have been in the midst of selling a business, moving and starting a new business (whew...). Maybe I'll have more time in a few months...

-Tim

dixontj on 03-10-2007 08:39 AM

#3

Hang in there Darrell! I haven't been as active this past year as I wanted due to work at work and work around the house, but have noticed that online communications have continued the trend of becomg more course. I suspect it is because it is so easy for some folks to hide behind a keyboard and say things they would never say face to face.

See you this afternoon for the Arianespace launch - thanks for providing the video feed, that is SO cool!

k3td on 03-10-2007 10:06 AM

#4

Rather than telling you what you are doing wrong, let's look at what you have done for the hobby:

1. you were responsible for starting a rocket resource on the web which was exactly what I needed when I got back into the hobby after a fairly long absence (but typical for a BAR).
   
2. You have promoted rocketry (I know some become confused and think you are promoting yourself, but they are wrong.)
   
3. Finally, you provided a virtual community and you work tirelessly (at least that is how it appears to me from the outside) to promote that community - that still should not be confused with self promotion.

So, hang in there. Unfortunately, what you are seeing is the degradation of public discourse, not something you have done wrong.

Steve_Shannon on 03-10-2007 12:05 PM

#5

Hi Darrell,

I will let you know how I interpret your current experience relative to my experience as being self-employed for 10 years, now.

Zig Zigler taught me that you must "qualify the prospect". That is, to determine (1) what is it that a (prospective) customer is in the market for? and (2) Will the prospect's needs be satisfied by the service or product that you provide? You find the answers to those questions and you have "qualified" whether the prospect will be well served by your (services), and most importantly, whether your investment in pursuing the prospect will serve you.

A fellow in a service industry (as I am in) once asked, "How do (you) price your jobs? I keep losing bids and I can't get my price right."

The first question I asked him was, "Who are you trying to sell to?"

I advertise to provide high-quality service. I have had (one) really great customer that after some lengthy period of time left me for another service provider. Upon my inquiring as to why this decision is made, I was told directly, "We have absolutely no complaint with the quality of your work, your responsiveness to our needs and the inherent value, none at all. But we just wish to bandaid things at this time and wish not to incurr the expense for the high quality services that you provide". This is a true story, and the "divorce" was conducted very amiably.

You see, not everyone is in the market for "good stuff". Some people actually desire the mediocre, and as a side perhaps have some underlying agenda or some completely unrelated reasoning which may perhaps even be ill-informed. You cannot be all things to all people.

The only thing that you are doing wrong is; You are not qualifying the Prospect.

Don't fret over the complainers because they will yield nothing for your time and effort. Concentrate on the productive venues for your product that are rewarding and fruitful. Analyze those productive venues and "qualify" new venues according to the criteria of the successful ones. Obviously in this case, UseNet (or wherever you experience this resistance and grief) is not a "qualified prospect". I don't spend my time trying to get the business of those that don't pay their bills. That is not very gratifying, and quite frankly would put me out of business.

Quite frankly, I do not know how you do it (produce this web site). The quality of this site, it's content and format are simply amazing to me. You present yourself as professional, objective, and a friend to all in the hobby that you aim to serve, and you are appreciated by those who benefit from and enjoy what you do - We, the "qualified prospects".

_______________________________________________

A dissatisfied customer will tell (10) others of their dissatisfaction

A satisfied customer will tell (1) other of their satisfaction

Mass marketing results in about a 3% success rate

Word of mouth results in 90% sucess rate

_________________________________________________


Kind Regards,

Mark

herefishy on 03-10-2007 12:40 PM

#6 Lose/Lose Situation

Quote:

One suggestion, if it is possible, would be to segregate your news releases by geography/demographic. In that case the number of items posted on the UK website would be both smaller, and arguably more relevant than what is posted on other Usenet sites.

Yes, this is easily doable, and the process I was taking. I was segregating the obviously non-regional announcements and they were still labeled. Consider this:

1. NO MATCH™ Ejection System eliminates electric matches: Now here is a product with no regional limitations. Alternative ignition systems of recovery devices are a new trend and display evolution in the hobby.

Reaction? "Advertising a product of little benefit to UK rocketeers."

2. ROCKETS Magazine releases MDRA's Red Glare 2006 DVD: I don't get to attend as many launches as I used to, but I sure like watching the videos of other launches, and assume most people do as well.

Reaction? "Advertising a product."

3. Sky Ripper Systems new 54mm hybrid line clears TMT hurdle: Hybrids are big in the UK, especially Contrails. A new hybrid system would be a shoe-in favorite to this crowd, right?

Reaction? "Advertising a product."

4. PML releases new threaded motor retainers - It's HAMR Time!: Motor retainers aren't a regional thing are they? Everyone loves motor retention, not just the Yanks.

Reaction? "Advertising a product" and "Buy British, you know it makes sense."

5. AeroTech Spring '07 "Level 1-2-3" certification promotion: Aerotech has a long standing reputation for supporting hobby rocketry's growth and outreach through sponsoring cert flights.

Reaction? "Not available in the UK." Gee, has anyone asked AeroTech?

6. Polecat Aerospace releases new 5.5" MIM-23 Army Hawk kit: Now granted this is a UNITED STATES Army Hawk, but people in other countries still like to model US rockets, right?

Reaction? "Advertising a product."

7. Rocket Store Limited announced as latest Rouse-Tech distributor: Finally, a UK-specific press release. I even caught Tom's incorrect references to The Rocket Shop and corrected them.

Reaction? "Incorrect information about stock levels" and "Sorry about this, someone posted this without my knowledge, I have amended the subject to conform to UseNet eticate [SIC>."

8. ATF seeks and is granted filing extension by U.S. district court: Yes, the lawsuit is specific to the United States, but it is a precedent setting case. Anyone who truly loves hobby rocketry would want to keep up with rocketry in the states, right?

Reaction? "Not newsworthy by any stretch of the imagination" and "you've turned into a twat who needs a good slapping."

9. Rouse-Tech announces 38mm tapped forward closures: A product that should be of interest to all rocketry fliers, no? Everyone wants tapped and threaded forward closures, right?

Reaction? "Advertising a product, threads incompatible with most UK hardware." Even though most hobby trends start in the US and radiate outward, I guess Rouse-Tech should have done this the other way around.

10. Madcow Rocketry: New product announcement - 2.6" Honest John: Again, there are UK distributors for Madcow, so UK fliers must like Madcow stuff, right?

Reaction? "Advertising a product," "I think this post is an advert," and "IMO it's spam and I'll never buy any product or service which is advertised in this manner."

Quote:

In either case though, I believe the Arianespace launch posting would be relevant to their site.

I did too:

11. Join Rocketry Planet for live webcast of Arianespace launch: Come hang out with your friends, chat with them while watching a launch, FREE. No danger.

Reaction? "Shameless self-promotion," "To me this sucks of an advert. 'Join my site to see this launch by special arrangement,'" and "I would rather watch it with the guys who built it."

These are not made up, not fabricated, but are actual comments pulled from a SMALL portion of the responses. This is a lose-lose situation. When you can't post onto a global network of NNTP servers any information about a new product being released because it's labeled an advertisement (unless that notice comes from a UK-based vendor who is advertising the products for sale, does so no more than once per week, precedes the title with the word ADVERT:, is less than 10 lines and contains a pointer to a website), then everyone loses in that situation.

In all honesty, I think they just want to leverage the resources of the global Internet NNTP server network to create their own little playground where they can play schoolyard bully. Other organizations foot the bill of doing that themselves so they retain total control, but I suppose it's better if you can get someone else to pay for your personality quirks. Although there were individuals who clearly displayed a desire to see the information posted, their vote was eliminated by the overpowering online bullies who text them into submission.

ddmobley on 03-10-2007 01:47 PM

#7

I'm just glad to have found a site such as this. I love the news format along with the open discussion of the hobby. The one paragraph teasers are perfect for seeing if it's something that might interest me or not and the information is pertinent to the hobby itself. Knowing that ABC Inc. has a new widget that could be used in an active guidance system is just as valuable as XYZ Inc. releasing it's F-7½ motor is just as valuable as the NAR/TRA vs. BATFE developments.

It all pertains to the hobby and you see stuff like this in successful hobby magazines such as 4 Wheel and Off Road or Model Railroader. It's how we know what's new in the hobby and I don't take their input as an endorsement. It's a press release and should be accorded the treatment it needs - to have the word spread to the hobby enthusiasts for their judgment.

Thank you for doing this. I, for one, appreciate it.

Raider Rocketry on 03-10-2007 01:47 PM

#8

Quote:

... have noticed that online communications have continued the trend of becomg more course. I suspect it is because it is so easy for some folks to hide behind a keyboard and say things they would never say face to face.

I think this is dead on and SO true.

Quote:

Unfortunately, what you are seeing is the degradation of public discourse, not something you have done wrong.

This is certainly indicative of what I see happening...

Quote:

UseNet is not a "qualified prospect". I don't spend my time trying to get the business of those that don't pay their bills. That is not very gratifying, and quite frankly would put me out of business.

The mark of a genius!

I guess I would also be appalled if neighborhood thugs tore down all the flyers I had spent hours tacking to telephone poles, too!

ddmobley on 03-10-2007 01:53 PM

#9

First of all let me say that I enjoy visiting RP and reading the news stories.

However I think Mark has hit the nail on the head with his post above. You've got to realise that different markets have different ways of dealing with things. They're isn't a right or a wrong way to post to RMR or UTR, just different ways.

In the spirit of international harmony, can I suggest that posts to UTR are tailored for the UK? Specifically:

While I quite like the announcements of new products, I consider them ads and wish they were marked as such. A lot of the grief you got/are getting can be avoided by adding [Ad> or [ANN> to the subject. You might not need it for RMR but people in the UK like to see it. (Now we can argue about what the definition of an ad is, but then we'd be lawyers and not rocketeers)


Make sure the content is accurate and pertinent to the intended audience.
The Rouse Tech posting was inaccurate and the Aerotech Cert offer was invalid in the UK (remember we already have to pay $600 for an M reload )

Post separately to RMR and UTR. That way we don't get the trolls that stopped me going to RMR from posting on our little bit of the internet. The last place an announcer/advertiser wants to be is in everyones killfile.


I hope you find the above suggestions contructive. Just remember "Different Strokes for Different Folks" (Whatever happened to Gary Coleman?)

Cheers


Colin

Init 6 on 03-10-2007 02:02 PM

#10

Quote:

However I think Mark has hit the nail on the head with his post above. You've got to realise that different markets have different ways of dealing with things. They're isn't a right or a wrong way to post to RMR or UTR, just different ways.

Colin, I too think Mark has hit the nail on the head, but I think you and I are getting a different message from his comments. I understand what you are saying, but to me, Mark is identifying that there is a cost or investment into what I expend my energy on, and that I have to expend my energy in areas where I will get the most return for my investment. And populating a UseNET newsgroup with new product announcements isn't going to get me as good of a return as populating this web site with new product announcements, therefore my time should be spend here and not there.

Quote:

While I quite like the announcements of new products, I consider them ads and wish they were marked as such. A lot of the grief you got/are getting can be avoided by adding "Ad" or "ANN" to the subject.

This wouldn't help in UTR since the charter prohibits ads except as follows:

"Advertising is forbidden except for short (less than 10 lines) private adverts for rocketry related items (launch equipment, rockets, software, books etc.) and announcements of events relevant to rocketry in the UK.

Suppliers of relevant goods and services may post a pointer to their website or an invitation to request details. This may not exceed four lines and can only be posted no more often than once a month. The subject line should include "ADVERT: ". Blatant off-topic advertising is not permitted."

Quote:

Make sure the content is accurate and pertinent to the intended audience. The Rouse Tech posting was inaccurate and the Aerotech Cert offer was invalid in the UK

The Rouse-Tech article said they had stock on hand when they did not. I do not see the mission critical nature of this error. I can not contact every manufacturer and every distributor to insure that the information the manufacturer has sent to me is accurate. It's another case of making sure my investment of time returns the biggest return. Just HOW MUCH do people expect for free? And unlike anyone that I am aware of in the UK, I am not simply resting on the fact that the AeroTeck cert offer is "invalid in the UK." I am contacting AeroTech myself to see if something similar can't be extended to the UK market. Why I had to think of that is beyond me.

Quote:

Post separately to RMR and UTR. That way we don't get the trolls that stopped me going to RMR from posting on our little bit of the internet. The last place an announcer/advertiser wants to be is in everyones killfile.

I *do* post separately to RMR and UTR. Are you asking me that if I make a post that is destined for both locations that I make two separate posts so that someone who responds doesn't have to edit their "To:" line in their newsgroup reader's response? So I should have to take twice as much time so that people who respond don't have to take the time to know who *their* intended destination is? That sounds a little lazy on the responder's part, since my intended destination *is* both newsgroups.

Quote:

I hope you find the above suggestions contructive.

Yes, very. I appreciate you taking the time to make them.

ddmobley on 03-10-2007 02:36 PM

Comments 1-10 of 47 shown. Click here to read comments 11 through 47.

Registered users can add comments and discuss this article. To participate, please login or register.