[meteorite-list] ORIENTATION Re: March 4 RSPOD Oriented (sic) 32kg stone

[Mr EMan]

Agreed and put far better than I, Darryl-- and that was the point to my
post-- not attacking anyone and definitely not attacking anyone in
particular.  When "oriented" is unquantified then anything and
everything could be oriented.  I can't download the Dave sent me but I
am comfortable that he did not use "oriented" uninformed. 

I've been criticized for criticizing Dave and I want to assure Dave and
the list that was not the intended purpose of my rant.  I was relying
on two things to pose my soapbox essay.  The use of "oriented" when any
surface features other than a fresh crack on fresh fusion crust is not
apparent in the photo selected for illustrating "orientation".  Note I
did not say it wasn't oriented--  I only asked that the use of the term
with the meteorite in the photo be explained/justified.  OK I score
another point for brashness.  Mia Culpa.

Hope this has a positive impact on the need for codified definitions
across the board when it comes to describing meteorites.

Elton
--- Darryl Pitt <darryl at dof3.com> wrote:
> in my experience, the single most problematic term in meteorite  
> commerce is "orientation."  this seems to be in part due to a  
> reluctance to differentiate objects which exhibit a bit of  
> orientation from those which exhibit nothing but orientation.
> 
> the new generation of collectors are not to be faulted for the  
> seeming misapplication of the term as a result of what is today its  
> liberal, ubiquitous use.
> 
> might i suggest that the list come up with a grading system of  
> orientation in much the same way that weathering and shocking are  
> graded.
> 
> three or four grades of orientation to finally---FINALLY--put this  
> notion to rest.
> 
> d.