What's Inbetween "Beginner" And "Experienced" ?

[Mr Q]

   We all know what posters mean when referring to themselves as a  "newbi" or "experienced" observer but what about those in between? What to call those who have had some observing experience - say a couple of DSOs under their belt as well as being able to identify a couple of constellations?

   I think that knowing at what level the poster is at when asking questions will help the responder in choosing what terms or levels of responses to use.

   As in other forum sites, letter abbreviations are often used such as DSO (deep space object), etc. So why not the following (or something similar)?

   "Beginner" (BObserver) -  Just got a scope or bins or just using naked eye and scanned the sky a few times looking for objects to look at.

   "Intermediate" (IObserver) - Has a few DSOs under his/her belt as well as knowing a couple of constellations and general idea of how the sky looks/changes from night to night or season to season as well as wanting to go beyond the Solar System's easiest objects.

   "Experienced" (EObserver) - someone with a few to many years of observing hundreds of DSOs with different scopes, locations, etc.

   A good idea or not? Knowing what level a poster of a question is at would sure help me decide what to say and how to say it when trying to help with questions.

   

[emadmoussa]

Bexperienced...!!

[Mr Q]

   OK...and how would you abbreviate that

[emadmoussa]

I think you categorization makes sense. But again...there are some levels within each category. Ok, I'm complicating it now..I'll shut up!! But seriously, I like your thinking!

[sologuitarist61]

'Apprentice'? 'Freshman'? I dunno, I give up!

[bambuko]

Call them anything as long as it is not another abbreviation   - they drive me nuts (the abbreviations not names ).

[Kropster]

'Noob' is good for beginner.

'Dabbler' for intermediate.

'Master' for experienced.

[jason.p]

Interesting idea, but it seems to me very difficult to put into practice. There is such a range of experience and ability that to define and label any particular stage would be arbitrary and subjective. For instance, I'm just coming up to my second year and have notched up around 40 Messiers. I don't see myself as a newbie, but a long way from "experienced" (whatever that means!). So where does that put me?<br />

<br />

Sent from my GT-P5110 using Tapatalk<br />

<br />

[Mr Q]

I think you categorization makes sense. But again...there are some levels within each category. Ok, I'm complicating it now..I'll shut up!! But seriously, I like your thinking!

  Well, I thought 3 levels would be useful, certainly no more than 4. In a way, I don't like categorizing anyone's skill level - a little "competition" may backfire in such a relaxing hobby.

   JasonP - With that many I'd say experienced - don't be so modest 

   That's why I believe the "Beginners" forums are so successful - inviting those with little or no experience to jump in for a helping hand. Though there are many more forums for the experienced than beginners at this site, some sites don't have any (beginner) forums at all

[knobby]

It does raise a serious point though... People really should check out a members other posts before taking any advice given. Difficult I know but if your new here and say moonshane for arguements sake suggests a 32mm televue ep for a DOB and someone that joined yesterday raves about the 25 mm super wide sky watcher ep. I know who i'd listen to.

[Mr Q]

   True but that was my point - to save some time trying to figure out what level the person is at before answering.

    I wonder how many "noobs" read "Advanced Member" under the avitars, not knowing it refers to the post count. The catergorizing could be entered by the poster at his/her signature (if willing to), which can be easily updated in the future at the control panel.

[Kirscovitch]

Good idea but as mentioned there are lots of grey areas.  Id place myself between beginner and intermediate. So a beginning intermediate observer. Or BIO for short 

[ronin]

Dangerous. :eek:

[bambuko]

   True but that was my point - to save some time trying to figure out what level the person is at before answering.

    I wonder how many "noobs" read "Advanced Member" under the avitars, not knowing it refers to the post count. The catergorizing could be entered by the poster at his/her signature (if willing to), which can be easily updated in the future at the control panel.

The only thing that post count proves is that someone is prolific (or has no "real" life ).

Some of the questions being asked by some of the so called "advanced" members border on... (oh well, I'd better not say - it is supposed to be minor friendly forum ).

The other more serious problem is to do with Dunning–Kruger effect or as Darwin put it so well:

"...Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge..."

I for one, will consider myself beginner to the end of my days

[Orange Haze]

I'm a bit like Matt, a bit of an intermediate beginner. I know a few things but am still learning all the time and still rely on the good folk here for guidance.

"You're going to need a bigger scale!"

[Steve Ward]

I think it's up to the individual asking the question to do any "research" into those answering a question .

I really don't see that introducing some sort of elitist league table regarding "experience" will do anything useful for the forum , it is far too friendly a place to need it.

There are many very experienced members on SGL , but unlike other forums I have visited there is no "self promotion" to be found , lots of knowledge but very little ego .

Perhaps the OP feels above answering "noobie" questions , personally I prefer to answer questions that I know the answer to and that I feel will in some way help the person asking the question , regardless of whether they are just starting out or have been "doing it" for half a century .

Long may SGL remain just as it is , a great forum with a great atmosphere ... 

[brantuk]

A lot of newbies arrive stating "Hi I'm a newbie" in their first Welcome Section post - and no equipment list. Intermediate or more experienced folks usually have some kit in their list and start asking intelligent questions or offering sound advice straight away. Others openly state their qualifications or experience or purpose for signing up.

I see no reason for specific labels other than the "bit of fun" designations like "star forming", "proto star", "white dwarf", etc above avatars. You can normally guage the level from their posted content - but if in doubt - you can always ask them what their experience is before answering a question, in order to pitch it right.

A good example is me - I'm still a beginner - but I'm very experienced at buying fabulous equipment - as you can see in my signature lol

[John]

"The only thing that post count proves is that someone is prolific (or has no "real" life  ).

Some of the questions being asked by some of the so called "advanced" members border on... (oh well, I'd better not say - it is supposed to be minor friendly forum  )."

Really ?, How kind of you 

"I for one, will consider myself beginner to the end of my days  :laugh:"

In tact, quite possibly 

[Langy]

I think that there are so many areas that you would need to cover it's quite impossible to do unless you had some form of a grid that people filled in their experience.

For example, I class my self a newbie to Astronomy, The amount of stars I can name is probably less than fingers on one hand, the same goes for constellations. Now I'm a person who dabbles with gadgets etc. I've spent hours watching YouTube videos and fell that I've got the hang of the basics about the universe and solar system, still by far behind those who are really interested in it (take a look at the post in here about expansion of the universe).

However I have over 20 years experience with photography, right from the days of where you had to get a range finder and light meter out before you even took a picture, let alone the calculations if you were going to use a manual flash. I've done my own film development, printing and moved on to digital over 10 years ago. I've also worked in IT for over 15 years too.

So I may well be a newbie as far as Astronomy in knowing names etc. out there is concerned, but when it comes to how the scope works with light and imaging with exposure times etc. I may not know about the specific processes people need to use but I know farm more about how it all works than most. I dare say that there are some expert images about who have less knowledge on how the system works and what to do when it doesn't because of wrong settings than I do because they have bought a high spec system that works. A classical example if how many people who own a DSLR really knows what all the settings do? A lot don't because they just switch to the P mode or where Astronomy is concerned set a shutter speed.

So does that make them an expert and me a total newbie regarding Astronomy.

If you really wanted to have a mark on how experienced someone is then you will need a table of some sort. I would suggest listings of things like Years seriously observing the sky and photographic knowledge as two very basic examples. Then you could have a rating for each.

Just because you haven't observed 100 galaxies does it mean you are not experienced. Yes I would like to observe a lot but I'm limited to my scopes spec and some may just be with a pair of 10x50 bins. Someone who can read a star map and get to an object within a couple of minutes in a clear sky in my eyes would be more knowledgeable than someone who has looked at 200+ galaxies on their 4 figured goto scope. But then that person with just a pair of bins may have no knowledge how a computer, DSLR, WebCam or CCD even works.

It's a very broad topic, my post count in increasing quite quickly because I like to try and help if I can, sometimes someone who has little knowledge of a topic can be of better help because they can give a non bias view about the topic. I wouldn't answer a topic where someone needed to know how to do something on their goto mount etc because I know nothing about it.

This is what is so good about the forums is that in this beginners section we are blessed with all these members who have a wealth of knowledge and experience in a vast amount of areas. I dare say not many people could answer every question but without their valuable input and friendly ways many of us newbies wouldn't be here now.

Sorry when I get typing I just don't stop....... 

[Mr Q]

   Steve - I agree. My point is that if we knew at what experience level the poster is at, the better we can answer his/her question on a level that he/she will understand better.

   I hate any forum site that runs on a "elitest" format. At one site (another subject), just because I posted so many posts, I was now "allowed" to be active in other special privilaged  forums. Talk about an ego trip.

   BTW, about that "fun" rating above the avatar - I think its not of any practical use. To me, it incites compitition in posting only.

   Wow, so many sensitive people out there when it comes to responding to a subject that even hints of any controversy

[Naemeth]

"The only thing that post count proves is that someone is prolific (or has no "real" life  ).

Some of the questions being asked by some of the so called "advanced" members border on... (oh well, I'd better not say - it is supposed to be minor friendly forum  )."

Really ?, How kind of you 

"I for one, will consider myself beginner to the end of my days  :laugh:"

In tact, quite possibly 

Sometimes post count and experience goes hand in hand though John, as you must know . 

I'd still call myself a beginner, been that way since I started 2 years ago and still come up with plenty of stupid questions, it's just I know some of the answers to those questions now .

[Digz]

Perhaps the OP feels above answering "noobie" questions , personally I prefer to answer questions that I know the answer to and that I feel will in some way help the person asking the question , regardless of whether they are just starting out or have been "doing it" for half a century .

Thats exactly what I try and do and think its a great philosophy to go by (although don't much time to answer questions as I would like being a mod, which is ok.)

I think categorising yourself 'can' help people in responding to your query however someones perceived idea of their level experience may be wildly different to what others may think. I also think you will inevitably end up judging peoples experience by comparing them to your own experience. 

For example - I have a healthy idea on what I am doing when imaging, I know what kit I need and think I have even taken some fairly decent (by my standards) images, however I still consider myself a newbie in astrophotography and probably will do for a great while longer.

Others may find my knowledge and experience basic, intermediate or advanced depending on their level of experience in comparison. How do you go about setting a benchmark that people can use....?

[bambuko]

Sometimes post count and experience goes hand in hand though John, as you must know . 

It was me (rather than John) who came up with this   and please note the use of "sometimes" and "some"

In fact, in great majority of cases you are absolutely right about the correlation between post count and experience, but it is not guaranteed 

[Luke]

I think level of experience is tricky. You could e.g. be a very experienced observer but a newbie to imaging. You can always ask the person for more info if it will help you answer the question?

   Steve - I agree. My point is that if we knew at what experience level the poster is at, the better we can answer his/her question on a level that he/she will understand better.

[Naemeth]

It was me (rather than John) who came up with this   and please note the use of "sometimes" and "some"

In fact, in great majority of cases you are absolutely right about the correlation between post count and experience, but it is not guaranteed 

My mistake .

Indeed it isn't guaranteed .