Interesting study on interstellar probe

That was my letter to the editor--right before two bashing Griffin over the term "Goof."

Hello, spacecowboy,

it was not because of being of topic at all - it was because of his being extremely off-topic and missing a chance to return to the topic. And talking about a heavier payload may be a preparation to turn back to HLLVs. He is talking by a style as if he thinks to be high above all the others here and he could teach them.

Nobody else I have seen applying a style like that here before. And I have experienced all people applying such a style to be of danger and to have bad impacts on organizations and talks only. One president and one vice-preisdent of organizations plus a couple of other people are sufficient experience to counterreact a little bit earlier instead of too late.

I could clarify it more abstratly and more philosphical if wanted - but here I wanted to make this statement only about it but not to discuss it.



Dipl.-Volkswirt (bdvb) Augustin (Political Economist)

Not to aggravate you further, friend, but I kinda thought that him talking about a heavier payload was more likely to be a preparation for him talking about a heavier payload...

"We gonna head 'em off at th' pass!" Doesn't work if he ain't goin' where you think he is...



Actually, we all have our days. Between Peter, myself, Keith, and publiusr, we tend to be a pretty abrasive lot: I could cite Peter's Orbital Mechanics, Keith's ImmInst thread, and publiusr's schpiel on Gen. Jumper, not to mention the numerous times that I've either come close to or actually succeeded in getting into trouble with Sigurd.



I think the lesson here is that abstractions (not to mention philosophy) can be very dangerous to discuss if you aren't perfectly clear in your arguments -- and that last little bit of a language barrier just might be what's hobbling both sides of the debates.

Oh, and publius: great letter.

Did you ?, I really can't remember that

That's because my brown-nosing skills are unsurpassed.