I don't know about the rest of you, but I am getting a tad tired about
all these usenet articles Stevan Harnad keeps cross-posting to half of
the world.
>Michael C. Berch ([log in to unmask]) wrote to the Usenet moderators
>group:
The reason there is a usenet moderators group is so that people who are
interested in usenet moderation can talk freely about it without
bothering people who don't want to talk about usenet moderation.
Personally, even though I run many lists I am not interested in the least
in discussions about peer review, academic elites, perpetuated entrenched
interests, and the like. These topics are probably of interest to a
number of people on this list, but they have little to do with running a
mailing list, and the people in question can subscribe to the relevant
lists/groups if they are interested.
Finally, I would very much appreciate not having my mailbox filled with
the personal bibliography of Stevan Hardnad, which not only does not
impress me in the least but also appears totally irrelevant to the
contents of the article. And we're not talking about 5 lines:
>---------------------------------
>Harnad, S. (1979) Creative disagreement. The Sciences 19: 18 - 20.
>
>Harnad, S. (ed.) (1982) Peer commentary on peer review: A case study in
>scientific quality control, New York: Cambridge University Press.
>
>Harnad, S. (1984) Commentary on Garfield: Anthropology journals: What
>they cite and what cites them. Current Anthropology 25: 521 - 522.
>
>Harnad, S. (1984) Commentaries, opinions and the growth of scientific
>knowledge. American Psychologist 39: 1497 - 1498.
>
>Harnad, S. (1985) Rational disagreement in peer review. Science,
>Technology and Human Values 10: 55 - 62.
>
>Harnad, S. (1986) Policing the Paper Chase. (Review of S. Lock, A
>difficult balance: Peer review in biomedical publication.)
>Nature 322: 24 - 5.
Thanks in advance for your cooperation.
Eric
|