RASC OH error acknowledged

I thought I had found an error in the 2008 RASC Observer's Handbook. But, what do I know? I'm a rookie in astronomy...

Page 202. Just above the table. The table caption or title reads: "MERCURY - MOST FAVOURABLE VIEWS IN 2008 FROM NORTHERN LATITUDES: MAY (Morning); OCTOBER (Evening)." The table title is reversed! This is incorrect. I double-checked this with various astronomy software applications. May is the best evening viewing and October, morning. Interestingly, the content within the same table is correct. I also checked this against the 2008 RASC calendar. I found it correct.

I put a question to the RASC Toronto Centre members via the Yahoo!Group listserv. The chapter president responded saying that May was best for evening viewing. And then went on to talk about the ecliptic and so on. But that was not really the point. I was trying to determine if the table was labelled incorrectly or not. Yet another member replied in an ambiguous way.

So, I was left with the feeling that they hadn't really, truly read my email. Or maybe I had not explained myself very clearly... Regardless, my question remained unanswered and the matter open.

I guess I'm stubborn...

This prompted me to go to the horse's mouth (no offence)! I attempted to contact the editor of the current edition, Patrick Kelly. Now I don't remember where I found the editor's email address, whether from the national site or from within the handbook, but I quickly learned that archives@rasc.ca was not correct...

I pointed out this new problem to the national webmaster. He responded quickly saying it was actually a bigger problem than I realised. Still, he gave me Mr. Kelly's direct email address.

With correct email in hand (virtually, anyway), I forwarded my question to the editor, for his consideration. That was January 16.

Still frustrated, on March 20, I re-sent my message to Mr. Kelly.

Today, he responded:

You are correct.  I suspect that I misread the chart on page 95.  The correction should be up an the handbook web site soon.

So, finally the matter is resolved. I did in fact find an error in the handbook. It was not my imagination. The error will be noted on the national web site. I was not trying to blame anyone. I just wanted people to be able to adjust their notes accordingly. That's all I wanted...