I fail to understand why a scientist should need to take four paragraphs to explain why a telescope building has to be white. With charts. In full-color.
Because sometimes the University really really really wants to paint it turquoise blue and beige and sometimes the Forest Service really really wants it to be a particular shade of brown and starts waving regs. at you and sometimes the designer gets a wild hair about mauve and ...I don't even want to talk about the tasteful blue on the ops blgd's gutters that was vetoed because it might
clash with the sky..
I really wish I were kidding, but I lived through these wars.
You should get to make up your own title, sarameg.
"God's will"?
Sort of. "Guidance" isn't a Rule, which has the force of law but is harder to amend.
Oh and then the Airforce gets hinky about its radar reflectivity or something and....
You should get to make up your own title, sarameg.
Totally. Part of the problem is, when I'm asked what I do, in seriousness, it takes a bit. I'm very random.
I really wish I were kidding, but I lived through these wars.
Oh, yeah. But really, in this kind of a document, I honestly don't think we need to say more than "The buildings would be white in order to reduce heat absorption, which would adversely affect telescope operations (See Appendix X for further discussion)."
See how simple that is? ::sigh::
And let all those lovely charts go to waste (or languish unloved, in an appendix)?
See how simple that is? ::sigh::
Yep. I wasn't picking at you, it just reminded me of the insanity involved. Everyone would emerge from those meetings looking a bit deranged.
YOU ALREADY HAVE A TITLE!
CUTIEHEAD SARACAKES!!!
OH. I may have to go buy a desk nameplate for someone.....
Heh. I almost added "before msbelle gives you one" to my previous post.
