I agree with Kelly, voted no but with the thought of leaving space for
other novel propellant discussions.
On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 8:14 PM Kelly Jones <kellyjones1@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I filled out the survey, and thought I would expound on it in a separate
reply:
I voted no, because I think it is pointless to have the list officially
expand into topics that are well-covered elsewhere, or even worse, just
become an 'anything goes' rocketry list.
That said, I can see using it to discuss other novel or rarely-used
propellants that are not sugar, per se, but don't already have a list or
forum covering them.
Just my opinion, and not meant to stomp on anyone else's.
Kelly
On Sun, Aug 20, 2023 at 1:08 PM Richard Nakka <richard.rocketry@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
The question has been raised as to whether, or not, the SugPro discussion
list should be expanded in terms of allowable subject matter. Currently,
the list mandate is for discussion of sugar propellants & motors. The
survey's goal is to ascertain what the SugPro members opinion is on this
matter.
Link to the survey:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/JXF5HCT
The survey will close 1 week from now (Sunday August 27, 2023).
Participation is encouraged....have your say...!
Thanks, Richard Nakka
(list moderator, as of today)
ps. This is my 1st attempt at using one of these on-line surveys...I hope
I did not mess something up :-\
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
Virus-free.www.avg.com
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail>
<#m_-5520131919458129497_m_6124407721356340968_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
