Give the Stardust team a break, folks!

[mmolvray]

I've done similar microscope research in biology, and, believe me, the Stardust team has done an AMAZING job getting the scans out there in a do-able format for us to look at. You can bet your bottom dollar that the research is underfunded and understaffed. Looking through the suggestions here, lots of people have very good ones, but changing things a) takes time, and b) means you have to go through major gymnastics to be sure that the results stay comparable. My bet is that it will take a couple of years before they can implement them. All of us on-fire volunteers will have the whole aerogel scanned by then .

There is a way to check a calibration movie you got wrong. You have to notice the "wrong" number go up on the movie you got wrong. Then you can click the "Back" button and re-examine it. There was one where I still couldn't figure out what the hell I'd done, but usually you can see it.

My suggestion has to do with our "Events." Supposedly, I have three of them, but I only recognize one of them as something I intended to log. The one "real" one also doesn't look so good to me now that I've had a bit more practice. Would there be some way to allow us to add an annotation along the lines of "On second thought, fuggedaboutit"?

Re the suggestion to reposition the "No tracks" button elsewhere: I'd say no. I find it very convenient to focus down through the layers, and then have the button right there. Moving the three buttons a bit further apart might be a good idea, although it's not something that's been a problem for me.