>>> I vote for MORE information rather than LESS.  Those who are listening can choose for themselves what they want to do with that information.>>> I agree with those statements.  On 28 July, while at an Old Faithful budget cabin, I heard someone on the radio (I don't know who) ask if anyone could verify that the Indicator was erupting.  The person who transmitted said he was at a computer looking at the webcam, and couldn't be sure.  My son took off running and was at Plume at the start of Beehive.  I wasn't able to drop everything and run like my son did, but I made it to a nice vantage point for the eruption.  We very much appreciated the transmission.  Whoever it was made it clear that they weren't sure, and that they were looking at Geyser Hill only by means of their computer.  We realized the nature of the information and did what we wanted with it. On a somewhat related note, I want to send my enthusiastic thanks to all the dedicated gazers who have gathered, digested, and shared information, both in sources like the listserv and Sput, as well as in person in the basins and over the radios.  Among other things, you helped my sons and me see our first Giant, on the 28th.  Because we could manage only a very short visit this summer, as usual, I thought the odds were slim that we would manage to see Giant.  We were the beneficiaries of a lot of willingly shared information that we did not help generate.  (And a little luck was on our side too---that is, the short interval.) Thanks!!  Kory Collier <div>On 7/31/07, Tara Cross <<a href="mailto:fanandmortar@hotmail.com">fanandmortar@hotmail.com</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"> <div> Given that water is often seen in the Indicator well before it actually erupts, some have asked whether it should still be called.  My suggestion is that it should definitely still be called, but additional details should be included in the call.  For example, the observer could say, "Water is visible in Beehive's Indicator but there is no bubbling yet."  Then the observer could note any further activity, such as when the Indicator begins to well up and bubble (in my experience, this meant that it was committed to actually erupting--correct me if I'm wrong).   The reason I make this suggestion is that there were a number of instances last week when people were at far-flung locations like Hams, Oblong, Fan & Mortar, etc., and were able to make it all the way to Geyser Hill for Beehive because of the early call of water in the Indicator (thanks especially to Barb Lasseter for investing the time at Beehive).   I do understand that there is an investment of time and effort to get to a viewing location for Beehive, and that it would seem to be a waste if the water in the Indicator dropped and did not return for a while.  (As a matter of fact, I expended quite a bit of energy getting to Beehive on July 20, having just arrived from sea level, only to find out that there had been some confusion on the radio and water in the Indicator had in fact NOT been called.)  However, as someone who is often at the other end of the basin, I vote for MORE information rather than LESS.  Those who are listening can choose for themselves what they want to do with that information.   --Tara Cross <a href="mailto:fanandmortar@hotmail.com" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)">fanandmortar@hotmail.com</a> <hr>See what you're getting into…before you go there. <a href="http://newlivehotmail.com" target="_blank" onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)"> Check it out!</a></div> _______________________________________________ Geysers mailing list <a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="mailto:Geysers@wwc.edu">Geysers@wwc.edu</a> <a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="https://mailman.wwc.edu/mailman/listinfo/geysers" target="_blank"> https://mailman.wwc.edu/mailman/listinfo/geysers</a> </blockquote></div>