no_reply@yahoogroups.com writes:

> There comes a time when any organization outlives its usefulness and the
> membership has other interests and it is time for it to rest in peace, but
also
> most organizations have periodic struggles in which there is a need to
> recruit new blood, so that there are enough participants for the organization
to
> be viable.

Al, you are correct here but this group is not quite ready to bite the dust.
We really do not have to attract new blood, because we have some very smart
and concerned people here who can help get the job done.
We just have to keep the conversations up long enough for others to join in.


> While people in some groups may share some mutual interest in other
> topics, sometimes those other topics belong in separate groups.

This is also very true. I belong to over 100 yahoogroups and forums like
Space.com
30 of the groups that I belong to are representative of the Libertarian
Party, 35 are representative of some aspect of space and the rest are all over
the
place in subject matter.

> I am in several groups with overlapping interests, and overlapping
> challenges. Do you think the science fiction fandom community would be
interested in
> this group? Some of them anyway. So seek out an exchange of links with
> other groups like Yahoo N3F and http://efanzines.com/
>
> I am also in the Yahoo group RFF = Reading for the Future. This is a group
> that seeks to help educators expose future generations to good writing about
> the future, mainly science fiction. Do you suppose that same audience might
> be inspired by some of the news this group looks at?
>
> I think there are some parallels between terraforming Mars and engineering a
> workable government in Iraq, but perhaps that topic best kept in the Yahoo
> group TYR, which also addresses other down to earth topics like "How come the
> price of oil is going up" and "The environment."

OK sounds like good groups I will check them out.

> I think it is unfortunate that different politicians promote things that
> others oppose, so anything proposed by one is at high risk of being scrapped
> after a couple of election cycles. I saw with the International Space Station
> that every 2 years each new crop of representatives in USA, and in other
> nations, had to change something, just to show they were DOING something.
> Consequently I thought it would never get done, unless the time to implement
> ingredients could get significantly shorter than election cycles ... i.e. get
the
> job steps completed before the next crop of politicians sabotage it.

This is only one of the reasons why the government should not be in the space
business. There are many others.

Thank You, John Wayne


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]