Two readers have responded positively to my request last year for inputs from readers of this column. Thank you, Tony Golding and Graham Tremeer, you have made my day by demonstrating that my readership is up 100% from a decade ago when the late Mary Papadopoulos was the only person who ever commented on my articles.

Both Tony and Graham make the point that hands-on instruction at the eyepiece could be a way to get more amateurs involved in variable star observing. I agree but am simply not physically able to conduct a group instructional session any more. For one thing, I cannot adopt unusual attitudes like trying to get my eye to the eyepiece of a finder pointing high in the sky. I am not the only member who can find and identify dim objects - perhaps younger members of the Centre would like to run an instructional session. I will be only too pleased to help with advice. Also, if a beginner is motivated to visit me as Tony did, then I would be glad to get him or her started off on the first difficult-seeming steps.

As for the star of the month, amateurs should reread the S&T article referred to in the 1999 December "Variable of the Month". As a group, we can do great work in the eclipsing binary field. Cataclysmic variables are the flavour of the month; many of us neglect other fields in order to be on the cataclysmic variable bandwagon. EB's are ignored by visual observers. Hugh Lund, Luciano Pazzi and Andre de Villiers do some photoelectric work but their output is minute compared with what can be done by visual observers.

Over to you, boys and girls!

Danie Overbeek

See also Danie's late-breaking message on page 9 of this issue Ed.