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