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