Re: Information Exchange Groups (IEGs)

From: Albert Henderson <chessNIC_at_COMPUSERVE.COM>
Date: Wed, 31 Jan 2001 08:13:51 -0500

on Tue, 30 Jan 2001 Jim Till <till_at_UHNRES.UTORONTO.CA> wrote:


> So, this final paragraph summarizes my overall 'position' (it doesn't seem
> to me to be a very controversial one!). I can only suggest that those who
> are interested in an historical perspective on the IEGs, and on the
> origins of a 'preprint culture' in high-energy physics (HEP), should read
> the article themselves, and not rely only on a highly-condensed
> interpretation provided by someone else.

        For anyone who missed my point (and I apologize for not making
        it ultra-clear) what is controversial, and what I find insulting
        to all science editors, is Till's interpretation that makes
        reference to the Star Chamber -- found in the paragraph that
        precedes his conclusion.

        Under the heading "Some Ancient History," Till starts the passage
        by telling us, "Concerns about the control of the quality of
        information disseminated by various means have a long and
        fascinating history. For example, the requirement that books] be
        licensed for printing (by the privy council or other royal nominees)
        was introduced in England in 1538."

        Anyone familiar with this history would understand that this was
        political censorship -- not science, scientific quackery, or the
        concerns of science editors. Science is about the accurate
        reporting of discovery, while political censorship goes quite
        the other way.

Albert Henderson
Received on Wed Jan 03 2001 - 19:17:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:46:01 GMT