Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!dgp.toronto.edu!elf
Newsgroups: comp.graphics
From: elf@dgp.toronto.edu (Eugene Fiume)
Subject: Re: Bezier
Message-ID: <1990Mar19.074124.29697@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>
Organization: CSRI, University of Toronto
References: <9003141916.AA24614@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> <204@usna.NAVY.MIL> <1990Mar17.025303.17752@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu> <1990Mar18.150238.2989@imax.com>
Date: 19 Mar 90 12:41:24 GMT
Lines: 39

Several interesting comments have been generated in just the short time since
Prof. Rogers issued what was in my opinion a heavy-handed statement and my
intentionally ironic (and equally heavy-handed) follow up.  I'll briefly
address a few issues that have come up.

First, you will note that I didn't say that looking in a textbook is dishonest.
I simply asserted that it was no more dishonest to get information from the
net than from a book.  As Dave Martindale and others have pointed out, the
ethics of using that information is context dependent.  In my graphics courses
I have seen lots of examples on both sides of the fence.

Second, it is nicer overall to be a Researcher rather than a Student
[though being a grad student or postdoc is an extremely enjoyable time of
life].  It is true that information exchange among researchers is fairly free,
but it MUST be properly credited in publications.  I would think that this is
something that should be learned while a student, but often is not.

Third, I think it's true that you have to have a tough hide to participate in
comp.graphics, and many have tried to humanise the newsgroup by providing
things like automated weekly postings (which I agree strongly with BTW).
The people who read this newsgroup have a very wide range of training and
similarly-wide range of personalities.  Try to think of the flames you receive
as preparation for the reviews you will receive from a SIGGRAPH paper
submission!

Fourth, it is easier to write light-weight fluff (like this message) than to
write technical articles, and researchers would probably prefer devoting time
to writing technical papers for submission somewhere than to submit them to
comp.graphics.  For this reason (and many others no doubt), you're highly
unlikely to ever see new research results announced in this group (especially
given all the greed-crazed patent idiots slithering around).  It takes a
lot of time to write well-informed technical articles, so those who are looking
for more meat in comp.graphics may continue to be disappointed.  Use the
library as a technical dietary supplement...and don't just look at North
American publications.
-- 
Eugene Fiume, Dynamic Graphics Project
Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
elf@dgp.toronto.edu, (416) 978-5472