So much for the contest! It has to be remembered that the costs associated with a stunt like this are not just a few minutes of typing, especially in this case. NASA managers must spend hundreds of hours on the phone with the press, in internal meetings, on line. The costs approach the astronomical, and none of it is spent on space research. Thanks to a TV personality's stunt, NASA has been forced to waste even more time (money) on this "contest". I wrote that I wasn't against naming the space station itself, but when we start throwing resources at naming the itty bits, it becomes wasteful and unnecessary. This case is solid proof of that. There are much better ways to approach PR matters, better ways to spend those dollars than being forced into reactionary mode. On Sat, Apr 11, 2009 at 11:24 PM, Dave Bennett <dlbennett@mac.com> wrote:
I'm sorry but "Colbert" just won't happen. As seen on their own website, NASA has veto power and they'll use it:
http://www.nasa.gov/externalflash/name_ISS/rules.html
4. NASA will take into consideration the results of the voting. However, the results are not binding on NASA and NASA reserves the right to ultimately select a name in accordance with the best interests of the agency, its needs, and other considerations. Such name may not necessarily be one which is on the list of voted-on candidate names. NASA’s decision shall be deemed final.