Monday, June 8, 1998
Netsurfer science is a hit with me. I have forwarded your address to several people. Many thanks for it.
Eve Savory
Great job everyone! This is about the most interesting thing I have found about general science on the web( with the possible exceptions being perhaps some of the sites you've shown in this issue!) Thanks for all the hard work, and I will be anxiously looking forward to the next issue while I pour over the info you just gave out.
Scott
Just a short note to tell you how pleased I am that there finally is an internet organization that specializes in reporting on scientific and technical applications in computers/internet. In my opinion, there has been so much focus on the business/entertainment aspects of computer and internet technologies, that the scale, scope, and importance of the scientific fields have been grossly under-reported and unappreciated. Curious, since it was the sciences that spawned the internet, and continues to provide leading-edge solutions and applications.
Dave
Loved your first issue. I've subscribed. Thanks.
George Bagwell, Steamboat Springs, CO
Congratulations on your new publication! I think you have another winner on your hands! I also want to say thanks for the many years of enjoyable reading I've had from Netsurfer Digest. You put out a fine product and I look forward to increased scope with Netsurfer Science.
Zhi Hamby Executive Director National Military Intelligence Assn and OPSEC Professionals Society
Aw, shucks, folks, we were just doing our jobs. Thanks for the kind words, though. They help us stay on track.
I would like to subscribe. Your subscription form didn't work. Thanks.
Manning Flaum
These letters, too, help us stay on track. We had a
fair bit of mail like Manning's. Response was a little more enthusiastic
than we'd expected, so it was all our little server elves could do to keep
up. During their bathroom breaks, though, you may have had an error message
when you tried to use the sub form. You squeaky wheels who sent your request
to the sci-editor were immediately oiled, er, signed up.
A quick check, too, suggests that you're not all double-checking your e-mail
address. Sorry, folks, but if that address is wrong, we have no way to
contact you to let you know we have no way to contact you. Judi
Thanks for putting together the first issue; it lives up to the high standards that Netsurfer Digest has set.
Just one small point of feedback for your advertisers . . . . I sometimes follow interesting ad-links, but I never follow ones that flash and distract me from reading the content. So I can promise the owners of those sites, I will not be visiting.
I apologize if the tone is a bit snarky; I realize you need the ad revenue to make a living. I just thought I would let your advertisers know that flashy ads annoy to the point where I will not follow the link.
Mark Levison
And, we will defend to the death your right not to visit. Thank you, Mark, for recognizing the realities of the marketplace, though. Judi
Marvelous site. Shocked to see casino ads on site meant for children. Please correct or I cannot recommend it for students. Thanks
This reader raises a couple points. First, while we
certainly hope that Netsurfer Science will be useful to children and
teenagers, and that they'll drop by, NSS is certainly not meant for children
and teenagers. We may get a bit silly by times, but by and large, we're
using grown-up writing to point surfers to pretty sophisticated sites.
On the subject of casino ads . . . . Gambling is a legitimate adult
activity, with broad acceptance in the community. How else would
state-sponsored lotteries make a go of it?
My inclination as a teacher, though, would be to use casino ads to introduce
lessons and discussions on statistics and odds. I'm fascinated, for
instance, by the misconception that people have about buying two lottery
tickets; in doubling their chances to win, they somehow think it cuts in
half the odds against them. What potential there is for a lesson that starts
just from that single premise! Judi
When I looked at the 28 April edition, I thought that you had indeed done something wonderful - got rid of frames. Alas, when I scrolled down a bit, they were back.
Otherwise, the new ideas are not bad, although in the past I've counted on you to provide me with goofy-valuable Web sites that I might otherwise never find. Don't lose them.
jvt
Sorry, jvt. You won't get much of a sympathetic ear if
you have a problem with judicously used frames - or any other judicously
used Web technology. We see a lot of frames - and I do mean a lot. Some are
badly - terribly - used, some smartly and effectively. We tried to fall into
the latter category. 'Nuff said.
Thank you for thinking the news ideas in Netsurfer Science aren't bad, but
about things goofy-valuable: They're a little tougher to come across in the
sciences, jvt, but our scouts are out. Judi
A Brand New Ezine! And already there is a long list of frequently asked questions... So the wise ass wants to know, if this is a brand new ezine, who has asked all these frequently asked questions.
Be a little careful with the NSS abbreviation. It's also used by the National Speleological Society (member #6053). They have a sense of humor, but might not like their abbreviation appropriated by another entity.
Best regards to the new baby publication
Bill Grenoble
Bill also said some nice things to us, but we're
already blushing, so we'll just go straight to the things that seem to be
important to him. On the subject of those FAQs: We have a bit of experience
in this field. Think of it as pre-emptive deja vu.
And - now that we've been warned about the National Speleological Society -
we'll always sit with out backs to the wall and with a clear view of the
door. (You want to offer a good spelunking site, Bill?) Judi
I have four nephews, three of whom are Web-savvy kids under age ten, and I am frequently sending them sites of interest. May I suggest a section each week which highlights a Web site for kids? Making sure that it has been screened by AOL for content for kids might not be a bad idea, so your many AOL subscribers will be able to get there with their kids without encountering an error.
Michael Rogers
Thanks... I've been looking for something like this for classes I teach. I'll pass it along to other teachers.
Ron Mendes
Thank you for the great elementary education site in your first Science issue. What a treasure! Keep up the good work.
Dana Weld, Cattail Creek School
I would like to see a regular section, or perhaps occasional special topic issue, devoted to places on the web where I can take a virtual class on topics related to science. Preferably a *free* class, and not some $400 per credit hour university thing. I don't care about college credit, I just want to learn something. Your e-zine seems the perfect way to get the word out about such sites. I'd be surprised if I was the only person out here who would value such sites.
Burch Seymour
Well, now. Your suggestions are appreciated. There's a
bit of a story here, though. Reader surveys for Netsurfer Digest have given
clear indications that NSD readers aren't particularly interested in
learning sites or sites directed to children. I write for NSD, so I've known
that for some time and, in planning Netsurfer Science, Arthur reminded me -
twice, I think.
Overall, with Netsurfer Science, the objective is that our reach should just
slightly exceed our grasp. That is, for the most part, content shouldn't
tell us something we already know - and we assume that NSS readers already
know a lot. Where that works in our letter writers' favor is that
sophisticated sites for children and adult learners very probably will just
slightly exceed most surfers' grasp - and ours, too.
I tend to think - and this is entirely intuitive - that a dedicated digest
like Netsurfer Science attracts readers who are more open to both learning
sites and sites directed to children. A month before we went online, in my
advice to our new netsurfers/writers, I said we shouldn't rely heavily on
such sites, but that I wouldn't reject out of hand their suggestions if the
learning and children's sites they want to review are superior ones. (It's a
gimme, of course, because all the sites we review ought to be superior.)
As for checking about kid content . . . . sometimes, learning takes
everybody to some grown-up places. I daresay our standards on the matter -
including the principles on which we base those standards - are very much
different from those of other people and publications. Consequently, I'm
loathe to subscribe to anyone else's filters. You'll no doubt get a sense of
content from our review. Sometimes, it may be worth the conversation to
shepherd your kids past the gates.
That said, I'm not inclined to create a special section for either class of
these sites because they're bound to cross subject boundaries anyway. But,
you can be assured that such sites will be reviewed and they'll be worth it.
Judi
Just scanned the new science newsletter and it looks like you have a winner. It would be an even bigger winner and even more useful if you included more of the human sciences like psychology and economics.
Dave Lighthall
We just didn't want to ride off in all directions at once, Dave. Psych sites will appear with the life sciences sites. And, in issue NSS 1.02, we added sociology, economics and geography. Judi
Address your letters to
sci-editor@netsurf.com.
Letters and signatures edited for clarity and brevity.