How can an apparently cut-and-dried textbook matter such as orbits become the topic for an international conference? The answer is found in statements from the reports of presidents of Commission 26 which criticize the existing state of affairs and is further elaborated upon by van den Bos (1962) in his well-known query “Is this orbit really necessary?” The objections refer to useless repetitions or multiple solutions and results that are distinctly inferior to observational accuracy. Unanimous agreement on what constitutes a useful orbit, or revision, is unlikely to be achieved, but considerable published work which is based more on computer experience than on double-star knowledge is clearly of inferior quality. To some extent, errors of observation (including poor distribution of data, etc.) are unavoidable, but published material contains errors due to the method of analysis which could have been avoided.