attached mail follows:
I disagree and really don't think AAROFLEX is "complaining" about
anything. What they would really like to do, the way I see it, is to
expand their involvement in the industry. What's so bad about that?
There are obvious benefits to AAROFLEX if they were allowed to
participate in the conference ranging from getting a larger audience for
their equipment to learning more about part building. Conversely, there
are some things that might also benefit SL users, RP in general, and 3D
Systems. The whole idea of a users group, I think, is to share
knowledge for the purpose of advancing the capabilities of each
individual user and the technology in general. This has undoubtedly
been accomplished with NASUG in the past. As a previous participant in
NASUG, I believed that this was mostly paid for by users and that the
monies collected for attendance at the conference was used to sponsor
the event. I have also heard that 3D contributes money but don't know
the extent of this.
Regardless of the who's paying for what disussions, I think that NASUG
and its users have more to gain with AAROFLEX participating and would
not hesitate to welcome them.
Bill
Stahlhut, Todd A. wrote:
>
> Dear RP'rs
>
> I just received a letter from AAROFLEX complaining that
> the North American Stereolithography Users Group (NASUG)
> refers to itself as it does. The letter suggests that because
> stereolithography is used by some to describe RP in general,
> that the users group, focused on 3D Systems technology,
> is doing something wrong in using the term. This users
> group existed before any of these other processes existed
> and has always referred to itself as stereolithography.
>
> Whats next - to suggest that COKE change its name because
> many use it to refer to a soda, or Klennex because it is often
> used to refer to a tissue.
>
> Give me a break!
>
> Regards, Todd Stahlhut
>
> P.S. Am I out of line here or does this seem strange ???
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jun 05 2001 - 22:39:22 EEST