Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Ward
Mike is perfectly entitled to create a 10-15-20 best list of whatever he likes.
|
That goes without saying. He can post what he likes on his website.
Referring back for the second time to Mike's stated goals of the excercise:-
Quote:
Originally Posted by iceman
The article was meant to highlight the great photography we do in Australia (many people on overseas forums have seen some of those names for the first time and were very impressed with their work), profile some of the people doing it, and to generate some interesting discussions.
|
Having regard to Mike's stated goals, I think his effort in putting such a list together would have gained a wider spread of acceptance and endorsement from the entire astronomy community, had he done it a little differently to how he chose to do it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogerg
I can't believe the crap Mike is getting for this!  |
Sir Donald Bradman was repeatedly asked after he retired, "who are the best cricketers of all time". He never once included himself. Sir Garfield Sobers was repeatedly asked the same question. He never once mentioned himself. Those two people "could" have rightfully posted themselves right at the absolute very top of the tree. In the best interests of humility and prudence, they never ever did. People rarely if ever threw rocks at them. By including himself in a subjective arguable decision, Mike has asked for people to throw rocks IMO. For someone I rate as a great bloke and highly intelligent, I think he could have done this smarter. A great place to start would have been to exclude himself with a rider noting that he had excluded himself on the grounds of humility and prudence, as he was sole judge, jury and executioner.
Cheers,
John B