Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
NASA It's funny.  Laugh. Space

NASA In Colbert Conundrum Over Space Station 398

Posted by kdawson
from the doing-the-right-thing dept.
After Stephen Colbert won the vote in NASA's contest to name a new module on the International Space Station, NASA found itself in a tough spot. According to Reuters, "Contest rules stipulate that the agency retains the right to basically do whatever it wants," but it may not be all that easy. At first NASA floated the idea of naming the new module's toilet "Colbert." But Last Thursday Congressman Chaka Fattah, D-Pa., urged the agency to respect the people's wishes. And Colbert turned up the heat on yesterday's weekly show: "So NASA, I urge you to heed Congressman Fattah's call for democracy in orbit. Either name that node after me, or I too will reject democracy and seize power as space's evil tyrant overlord. Ball's in your court."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

NASA In Colbert Conundrum Over Space Station

Comments Filter:
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @06:57AM (#27414237)

    I'm sorry, if NASA wants to give in, then fine, but at this point Colbert has reached the level of 4Chan for these pranks.

    First he changes Wikipedia, then he gets a bridge in Hungary named after him, now a Space Station module.

    There is NO reason why NASA should bother, and I'm getting bloody sick of his internet vandalism.

    • by fudgefactor7 (581449) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @06:59AM (#27414255)
      You have no sense of fun at all.
      • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @07:46AM (#27414643)

        Enjoy his humor for what it is and play with it. Name the toilet after him.

              I'm off to take a "Colbert", back in 20 min.

              Hey, do you have a portable "Colbert"? My Depends box is empty.

        I can't believe I bothered to write this. What a waste of effort, bandwidth and humor.

        NASA shouldn't name the entire node after anyone that isn't famous for doing good deeds for space. Heck, Jimmy Doolittle would be an excellent choice as the father of avionics.

      • He won the vote - that proves his point that he can cajole the (fifteen to seventeen year-old North American male) public into stuffing a ballot box.

        I have to say that if he continues down this road, one he's clearly been down before, it signals the beginning of the end to those of us not wearing the jersey.

        April Fools or no, give it up and be a man, Coal Bear. Rather than suggest something interesting or meaningful (I submt 'The Colbert Brown Eagle'), he perpetrated this out of pure vanity, and I for one,

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by severoon (536737)

          Wow. Talk about -whoosh-.

          He's doing this stuff to make a point. His entire character on the show exists facetiously to prove a point. I'm not going to explain it to you because you should be smart enough to figure it out for yourself. If you're not, then you don't deserve to understand the knowledge he's trying to impart. (See, this is kind of his point...I'm not going to tell you, you have to think for yourself.)

    • by tpgp (48001) * on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @07:01AM (#27414267) Homepage

      I'm getting bloody sick of his internet vandalism.

      Me too! He should be forced to scrub his vandalism off & return the Internet to its original pure / virginal white.

    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      by Hasney (980180)
      I know, before he came along the internet was just a load of facts and Wikipedia especially, was 100% accurate.

      I also heard that Colbert founded the RIAA. How dare he :(
    • by aliquis (678370)

      Links? What did he do on wikipedia? Why did they name the bridge after him?

    • by owlnation (858981) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @07:17AM (#27414391)

      I'm getting bloody sick of his internet vandalism.

      Get back to the dungeons of wikipedia where you belong, and don't forget to polish the jackboots from your Fahrenheit 451 Fireman's uniform.

      Name the station "Colbert".

      The publicity will only do NASA good. It will help popularize space funding amongst an audience of political science students -- and likely future politicians, as well as a whole bunch of other people who simply don't care. Stephen is a friend of NASA, his audience isn't comprised of space geeks on the whole. Having Stephen get them interested in Space is a damned good thing. There is no loss in naming the station after him, no especial advantage in naming it serenity or anything else, but there is a substantial gain in naming it Colbert -- it just makes sense.

      • The thing is, Republicans tend to be bigger spenders on space than Democrats, particularly manned space flight. Democrats tend to argue that putting people in space is a luxury and we should be spending money on the poor, or, pursue unmanned flights for the science.

        Republicans tend to argue that manned space flight is a national security thing. It doesn't hurt the cause that two of the largest Nasa facilities are in traditionally Republican areas - Texas and Florida.

        IF you name this station after a libera

        • by DutchUncle (826473) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @09:17AM (#27416089)

          ... It doesn't hurt the cause that two of the largest Nasa facilities are in traditionally Republican areas - Texas and Florida.

          I think you're confusing cause and effect here. The facilities were located there in the first place, along with the prospect of the industries that would grow up nearby, in exchange for the congressional votes to fund them. (It helps that Florida has the most rotational spin of the continental US, being closest to the equator, but that's just a bonus.)

          It's a module, not the whole station. Name it, and take the publicity. Or make sensible rules, like we have for stamps and money, that we only name things for people dead long enough to have stable reputations. (gee, maybe that would help in other contexts as well . . .)

          • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

            by gknoy (899301)

            Rotational spin is great, but so is the fact that it has no land to the east of it, which means we have fewer risks of dropping disposable/reusable rocket bits on populated areas (since we launch in an eastward direction, normally).

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by DaveV1.0 (203135)

        As NASA does not name things after living people, does that mean we get to kill him to allow him to qualify?

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by aonaran (15651)

          Living? It could still be called Colbert and named after Stephen's great-grandfather.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by vadim_t (324782)

        Ha. You live in a strange world if you think giving something a name will suddenly make it popular. For a week, maybe. Then everybody will forget about it.

        The reason space isn't as popular as it used to be is that nothing interesting is being done. Back when it got started it was very exciting. America vs the USSR. Things that had never been done before, being done with machines built on monumental scales. Lots of risk and danger, but lots of potential fame and prestige.

        Now? Things got stuck. Companies laun

    • NASA should say "I for one welcome space's evil tyrant overlord."

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by Jurily (900488)

      Colbert was disqualified because he's not dead.

      The bridge is called Megyeri Bridge.

    • by mbrod (19122) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @07:38AM (#27414559) Homepage Journal

      Just like NASA, you are where fun goes to die.

    • That is the sound of the significance of this event breaking the sound barrier as it passes over your head.

      Colbert is a satirist. His job is to lampoon the establishment, popular culture, fad, etc, etc. He has just lampooned public voting competitions, which have been in vogue of late. Internet, SMS, email, telephone based, it doesn't matter. The bottom line is that these "votes" are little more than popularity contests decided by people with too much free time and little else to do with it. Colbert has simply shown how inherently vulnerable these votes are to manipulation. PZ Myers [pbs.org] has been doing this sort of thing for years.

      Public poll competitions are a thinly disguised publicity stunt. Frequently, they simply demean and trivialize the event they are promoting. In the case of NASA, this poll has been a farce from day one. Even before Colbert, justifiably, entered the competition, the top contender for the module's name was "Serenity", an obvious reference to a recent sci-fi/fantasy show.

      This was a billion dollar module meant for serious scientific research and NASA, itself a multi-billion dollar publicly funded institution, had chosen as it's first choice of name, that of a fictional spaceship from some bubblegum space opera made for teenagers, which pays only lip service to scientific fact and theory. This was a (supposedly) serious scientific and educational organization about to name a space station component after something that has never and can never exist. The level of unprofessionalism beggars belief.

      What is anyone supposed to think of NASA after such a stunt? Is the whole organisation composed of people who base their ideas on TV shows and loopy ideas instead of hard theory? Considering the organization's continued stance on the Space Elevator concept, despite its proven absurdity over the course of over 50 years, I would have to say that, yes NASA is composed of juveniles who have their heads in the clouds and no idea how to get their actual bodies up there.

      For get "Xenu". "Serenity" was and is the real problem. Frankly, Colbert has stepped in and dignified the proceedings by finally putting and end to the debacle. NASA will save itself a lot of face in the long run by naming the module "Colbert" as a reminder of their own folly. Naming it "Serenity" would be a permanent stain on whatever dignity the organization is supposed to have.

      And organisation that allows idle tweenagers, teenagers and twenagers to name space modules, rockets, or satellites is an organisation that has no right to send such things into orbit.

      • by powerlord (28156)

        Frankly, Colbert has stepped in and dignified the proceedings by finally putting and end to the debacle.

        ROFL. Thanks, I needed a good laugh today.

        While Colbert may be bringing the idea of "Internet voting" into question, the idea that he "dignified the proceedings" is rediculous.

        The only thing he's ever dignified was the White House Press Corp Dinner, and look how well that turned out.

        As for naming the new ISS module "Colbert", I agree with the AC up top, let the "Colbert Nation" put their own station in

      • by squoozer (730327)

        So what would you call it? You could name it after a famous scientist or a scientific theory but that doesn't really engage with the average person. Alternatively you can give it a name based in a horribly contrived acronym which means nothing to anyone. Serenity might not be a terribly scientific name and the show certainly wasn't based on scientific fact but it is a name a large number of people interested in science are familiar with.

      • by jollyreaper (513215) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @09:09AM (#27415867)

        This was a billion dollar module meant for serious scientific research and NASA, itself a multi-billion dollar publicly funded institution, had chosen as it's first choice of name, that of a fictional spaceship from some bubblegum space opera made for teenagers, which pays only lip service to scientific fact and theory.

        Fact #1: The test airframe of the Shuttle Orbiter was named Enterprise after a write-in campaign by Trekkies. Precedent has been set.
        Fact #2: There's no sound in space in Firefly, which is better than 99% of science fiction shows depict. Show some love.
        Fact #3: NASA could dearly use a Colbert bump.
        Fact #4: Firefly kicked ass. Neer-neer.

        NASA should take this ball and run with it. It's lovely and whimsical farce that puts the agency in a mirthful light. One of the ISS astronauts already did a phone-in segment with Colbert. Last January we saw the clip of the Steelers fan up there waving his Terrible Towel in orbit.

        This is a win-win sort of thing. Costs nothing, hurts nothing, gives people a smile when they think of a government agency that's gotten more press for fuckups than successes of late. The only kind of person who could be against this is some humorless old shit.

    • by Midnight Thunder (17205) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @08:29AM (#27415055) Homepage Journal

      I'm sorry, if NASA wants to give in, then fine, but at this point Colbert has reached the level of 4Chan for these pranks.

      So am I, but on the other hand if this gets the space station back into the mind of the general public, they there may just be an up side, and a lesson learnt.

    • ...I'm getting bloody sick of his internet vandalism.

      Get off my internet!

  • Would be Great PR. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by arthurpaliden (939626) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @07:01AM (#27414271)
    If NASA were smart they would name the thing "Colbert" and encurage the chap to do a "ISS Report" or similar NASA/space oriented report on his show at regular intervals. Keep space research in front of the people. Even to the point of reporting on NASA's own humorous internal mistakes/problems/gaffs with actual data supplied by NASA. National / International attention and it costs them nothing.
    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by bhima (46039) *

      Given the Nature of the Colbert Report, I think they'd get a lot more millage out naming the toilet of him. I think his fans would really enjoy their artificial outrage... or at least I know I would.

      Besides, I voted for Serenity

      • by EdZ (755139) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @07:35AM (#27414529)
        Name the node Colbert, but pronounce it with a hard 't' (i.e. cohl-burt).
        • by melikamp (631205)
          Yes!
        • Re:Humor in Space (Score:5, Insightful)

          by GargamelSpaceman (992546) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @09:39AM (#27416837) Homepage Journal

          I think Colber[t] actually pronounces his name as ColberT in private. This is based on me catching him one time on air saying ColberT when there was no comic reason for him to do so. ( I hate saying there's no comic reason for something since there is always the possibility that a joke flew by undetected ) It's unlikely that someone who had always pronounced their name one way would slip, though not impossible.

          The name of a pod has no effect on it's usefulness. It's just a freaking name! Being named Colbert or Xenu (which would have been funnier than Colbert) is really immaterial to any science, like studying the effects of weightlessness on Twinkie shelf life, that they do up there.

          What's wrong with humor in space? It's part of putting people in space. Humor and satire comes with them.

          It's interesting to wonder about who exactly is pissed about a space station module being named Colbert.. Xenu would have been easy to dismiss for religious tolerance reasons, even people who hate scientology may legitimately be offended by someone poking fun at them, but the name Colbert isn't obviously offensive in any way. Yet the offense exists, or there would be no challenge to the nodule being named Colbert. The interesting question is who is being offended?

          Serenity seems to have less offense value than Colbert. If it had won on it's own merits, nobody would have objected, and it wouldn't have even made the news. The people who are offended by the nodule being named Colbert aren't offended by Serenity.

          I think there are people for whom space is sort of a religion. It's like a girl they've built up in their minds to some ideal that nobody can ever live up to. In their imagination, it has to them all the attributes they need it to have to be their holy land, the place where all their favorite sci-fi stories took place. And mere mortals can't go there - only NASA annointed astronaughts, so nothing ever happens there to destroy their preconceptions of the holy place.

          Yeah, it's a girl and a religion. The probes NASA sends are like these folks' dingaling. Naming one of their nodules Colbert is like painting their dingaling pink.

          These people need to snap out of it, and a pink dingaling paintjob is just the ticket. When and if people really start to live and work in space, outer space will offer just as many wedgies and swirlies to these people as earth has justly given them. These people need to realise this and work to correct the here and now, and not wait for the prophesised heavenly age of outer space where losers are cool for being losers. Believe me, the folks really doing things in space, aren't these people. They are winners of a game requiring non-loserness. The people these people worship are more like a boy band with a fanbase of stupid thirteen year old girls. These losers are the thirteen year old girls who have gone off the deep end - not the average fan. These losers are the drunken sports fans who paint their hairy chests, backs and beer bellies blue to cheer on their favorite football team shirtless while it snows.

          Somehow, these people are being given more importance than they deserve. They are the base, they make the party. NASA uses these devout space-cultists as pillars of it's church. Without them, they'd have no cult. For that reason, NASA is afraid to alienate them. But that's exactly what they should do, since they alienate everyone else.

          • Re:Humor in Space (Score:4, Interesting)

            by Bemopolis (698691) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @11:03AM (#27418965)

            I think Colber[t] actually pronounces his name as ColberT in private. This is based on me catching him one time on air saying ColberT when there was no comic reason for him to do so. ( I hate saying there's no comic reason for something since there is always the possibility that a joke flew by undetected ) It's unlikely that someone who had always pronounced their name one way would slip, though not impossible.

            SC has stated in interviews that the family pronounces it with the hard T. His father wanted to use (revert to?) the French pronounciation, but did not do so in deference to HIS father. So, in honor of his (by then) late father, SC changed from the hard T as he left South Carolina to go to Northwestern.
            </anecdote>

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by gEvil (beta) (945888)
      If NASA were smart they would name the thing "Colbert" and encurage the chap to do a "ISS Report" or similar NASA/space oriented report on his show at regular intervals. Keep space research in front of the people. Even to the point of reporting on NASA's own humorous internal mistakes/problems/gaffs with actual data supplied by NASA. National / International attention and it costs them nothing.

      While I don't disagree with the idea, aren't they pretty much getting this for free from Colbert already? Sure,
    • ....they would refuse to give into the Colbert, and the resulting broohaha will give them publicity that money simply can't buy. The fly in the ointment, of course, is that now the congressman who can impact their funding, is on Colbert's side, so they wouldn't want to piss him off. Of course, he may be a smart congressman too, and may be after the publicity that results from Nasa not giving in - it would certainly raise his public profile.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      What would be the point? The people who watch/listen to Colbert don't vote in real elections.
  • by olddotter (638430) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @07:01AM (#27414273) Homepage
    Based on yesterday's post. http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/03/31/1332257 [slashdot.org]
  • NASA (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Ferret96 (1293480) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @07:07AM (#27414327)
    I understand why NASA put a clause into the rules stating that it can do whatever it wants... There needs to be a way out in case some yahoos try to name the station something inappropriate, however there is nothing wrong with Colbert. It's one thing to put the literature into the rules to make sure that the name of the new module isn't "Enola Bay" and another thing to just change the name on a whim because a few people at NASA were hoping on "Serenity". Sounds a little petty to me.
    • Re:NASA (Score:5, Insightful)

      by v1 (525388) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @07:44AM (#27414607) Homepage Journal

      I wouldn't be surprised if they justify things by saying simply that the people that were actually interested in naming the module, voted Serenity, and that was the point of the vote, not to see who could dig up the most voters for unrelated reasons. Really, they didn't vote to name the module after Colbert, they voted to do what Colbert asked them to do, with absolutely no interest in what it was.

      Based on that it would seem like a good compromise to name the module Serenity, yet name some significant part or component of the module after Colbert.

      Because really in 2 months very few of those that voted Cobert are going to care one way or the other about it, they'll have already moved on to Colbert's next PR stunt. There's no reason for the rest of the planet to be stuck with the stunt's legacy. The people that voted Serenity do care and have an interest in its future.

      This is probably the first time I have EVER seen anything even remotely approaching a good justification-by-example for the electoral college.

      • Re: (Score:2, Troll)

        by v1 (525388)

        Actually with slightly more retrospect on this, I think the entire group that wrote in Colbert shouldn't even count. They didn't vote. They did what Colbert asked them to do. Someone that actually votes is expressing an opinion on an issue. This group that wrote in Colbert weren't expressing their opinion, they were just doing what he asked them to to. If he had asked them to write in "MrColbert" instead of "Colbert", then MrColbert would have won. None of them had any actual interest in "Colbert" bei

        • Re:NASA (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Binestar (28861) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @08:02AM (#27414807) Homepage

          They voted. Colbert just did good campaigning. Or do you think people who see a campaign ad and vote based on that aren't valid votes either?

          • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

            by mea37 (1201159)

            I'm not so sure about what you're saying. I think there is a significant difference between a campaign ad that affects people's votes because it colors their view of what's in their own interest (how campaign ads in real elections work, and a valid part of the election process), vs. Colbert's request that affects votes of people who have no interest in the matter. If you don't see that difference, then consider this: how much luck has Colbert had getting people to write his name in for any actual public e

        • Re:NASA (Score:4, Funny)

          by xs650 (741277) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @08:17AM (#27414931)
          Why should that election be different than any other election?
  • by Telecommando (513768) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @07:09AM (#27414347)

    They're lucky the winner was Colbert.

    Imagine what it could have been named if the 'b-tards' over at 4-chan got involved.

  • by Bearhouse (1034238) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @07:17AM (#27414395)

    More proof, if any were needed, that NASA is totally clueless about external communication & PR.
    Any kind of PR pro would have predicted this - its not like it has never happened before in public naming competitions and even elections.

    So, suck it up guys. As another poster has pointed out, play the game and make it work for you.

    What I cannot understand, though is why, in these cash-strapped times, they did not auction the name off? Could have raised some much-needed funds.

    • by tburkhol (121842) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @07:31AM (#27414507)

      What I cannot understand, though is why, in these cash-strapped times, they did not auction the name off? Could have raised some much-needed funds.

      I imagine that's just what Blagojevich said to his advisers just before putting Obama's senate seat up for auction.

    • by Spatial (1235392)
      Because the name would be even worse than 'Colbert'? Sup guys, just heading over to the Coke module...
    • NASA is great at wasting money. Take a look at the ARES project compared to the Direct project. Instead of using existing engines, and existing boosters, and existing tankage, they've decided on using new engines, new boosters, etc. The ARES I can't even lift the Orion module into orbit. They've been trimming weight, and removing features from Orion just to make it light enough for ARES I to lift. As it is Orion will have to use its service module engines to make orbit, which cuts into its usefulness o
    • What I cannot understand, though is why, in these cash-strapped times, they did not auction the name off? Could have raised some much-needed funds.

      Might have something to do with that being against the law.
       
      Not that it would have done any good either way, as any funds raised that way go into a general fund and are doled back out by Congress. (Which is a feature, not a bug. It's designed to prevent federal agencies from circumventing the budget or selling off federal resources for personal or agency gain.)

  • Tough spot? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Scutter (18425) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @07:18AM (#27414399) Journal

    Even after reading the article, I still fail to grok what the "tough spot" is. Is it just that they don't want to name it "Colbert"? That's not a tough spot, that's just obstinance.

    • by DaveV1.0 (203135)

      NASA does not name things after living people.

    • by Speare (84249)
      They may see this as a precedent, toward full-blown corporate sponsorship. Fast forward: "NASA presents the Microsoft Mission to Mars, Version Four, bringing Microsoft Software to All Reaches of the Known Universe. Let's check in with Chief Bacteria Detection Evangelist, and Microsoft Executive Steven Sinofsky... any bugs up there?"
  • by cerberusss (660701) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @07:25AM (#27414449) Homepage Journal

    Something similar happened in The Netherlands, although on a smaller scale. Some company ran a contest to name a new type of potato chips (en-uk crisps) and internetters voted en masse for the name "WithoutStyle", after the similarly named blog [geenstijl.nl]. In the end, the company bended to the pressure, although for a short time only.

  • the NASA requirement is that the person who it is named after has to affix the signage.

    they have 1 year to comply (a their own expense).

    he.he.he ..

  • Didn't Serenity get a lot of votes because of its fan-base as well?

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0379786/ (the film)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serenity_(Firefly_vessel) (from the TV show)
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serenity_(film)

    Probably not so much because of:
    http://www.serenity-band.com/ (the Austrian Metal band)

    While the relief a toilet can enable, and that quiet time alone (hopefully it's a room with a view of the planet) could be described as Serenity, I doubt that is what voters were thinking.

  • by roywfall (622207) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @07:49AM (#27414683)
    Name it after Tek Jansen and everybody wins.
  • With an entire town...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_or_Consequences,_New_Mexico [wikipedia.org]

    Ralph Edwards frowns on Colbert's shenanigans.

  • The first Colbert suggested by wikipedia is :
    Jean-Baptiste Colbert (1619 -> 1683), French minister of finance under King Louis XIV

    This state servant was one of the primary artisan of the present French situation, where we have national or quasi-national big corps, with very tight links with the central administration.
    Colbertism, named after him, is a form of mercantilism where the good of the nation is only really the good of the ruling class.

    Perhaps this historical view is not completely irrelevant for
    • Now, for international observers, perhaps your TV host is famous in the US, but US is not the world.

      You would be the "international observer," Bunky. Slashdot is a US site which maintains a US perspective [slashdot.org].

      Stephen Colbert is an American satirist who frequently pokes fun at the French for their pompousness, lack of humor, and nationalism. So, mer-see bow-coo for reminding us how much truth there is in his parodies...

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by Archon-X (264195)

        So, mer-see bow-coo

        Thanks, I work out!

        Mer-see bow-coo != mer-see bow cou (thanks, nice ass vs thanks very much)

  • Maybe they should go with that it may give the Fox execs the boot up the ass to re-launch the series. But then again if you boot a Fox exec up the ass is he going to know where you hit him????
  • NASA who? (Score:2, Informative)

    by glebovitz (202712)

    Before Colbert, I forgot NASA still existed.

  • by Sponge Bath (413667) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @08:13AM (#27414897)

    Flush an effigy of Colbert out the air lock of the ISS and broadcast the event live.

  • OK, so NASA is unwilling to name the node after a living entertainer who regularly voices polarizing opinions. However, they want to save face and not appear to override the vote. Here's a solution: double down.

    Allow Stephen Colbert (the character) to hold a second vote to select a Truthy, flag-waving name for the station. Stephen Colbert (the character) could have no end of fun with this. By closely controlling options in the second vote, NASA and Colbert (the person) could ensure a name that NASA coul

  • Just call it Blench Treetops (Anagram for Stephen Colbert), which you should do if you're on board it...
  • About time.... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by david_thornley (598059) on Wednesday April 01, 2009 @09:03AM (#27415727)

    I'm from Minnesota. We elected Rudy Perpich and Jesse Ventura as governors. We elected Michele Bachmann as representative from the Si(x)th Congressional District. I've watched the hardest-hitting coverage of the last election on the Daily Show. I saw in the paper this morning that the courts have ruled only 400 more ballots will be recounted in the Senate race, making Al Franken's victory almost assured.

    I think it's time we recognized the need for real comedians in our government structure. Now, Colbert is still alive and being funny, so he's not a good candidate for naming a government something after him, so I'm going to propose naming it after George Carlin.

  • ... because, as has been pointed out, the people who spammed NASA's poll were less interested in what the module got named, and more in doing the bidding of Mr. Colbert. But what the hey. Let's go ahead and name it Colbert. (I just wonder what sort of copyright issues might come up out of this - can a government entity use a copyrighted name for a publicly funded project? Hmmm...)

    I have a reason for suggesting we go ahead. There is one other person whose name is guaranteed to be associated with Earth, even

The use of anthropomorphic terminology when dealing with computing systems is a symptom of professional immaturity. -- Edsger Dijkstra

Working...