Newsgroups: comp.sources.d Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!mintaka!bloom-picayune.mit.edu!athena.mit.edu!jik From: jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens) Subject: Re: v01INF1: Status - Status of comp.sources.reviewed Message-ID: <1991Apr14.210953.12913@athena.mit.edu> Sender: news@athena.mit.edu (News system) Organization: Massachusetts Institute of Technology References: <16390:Apr1305:56:2091@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <1991Apr14.190013.9991@athena.mit.edu> <6338:Apr1420:14:1691@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> Date: Sun, 14 Apr 91 21:09:53 GMT Lines: 41 In article <6338:Apr1420:14:1691@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>, brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes: |> No. In fact, it is you, Mr. Kamens, who have explicitly made such an |> assertion. I find it rather funny that you can expose a ``fatal flaw'' |> in my argument by making a claim which, you later insist, is offensive. There is a difference between saying that people do not know how journals work, and saying that people do not know what they have voted for. You have claimed that the reviewers apparently don't know how "real" journals work. I have, for the sake of argument, accepted the validity of that claim (although other postings in this newsgroup disputed it). I have then gone on to point out that it is unlikely that the people voting for the gorup know any more about how "real" journals work than the reviewers. However, I then went on to explain that it is quite possible that the people voting for the newsgroup *think* they know how "real" journals work, or, at the very least, they think they know how the people proposing and participating in c.s.r intend for it to work. If their expectations agree with those of the moderator and reviewers, then they are getting what they paid for, so to speak. Now, it is YOU who have asserted that people aren't going to get what they have voted for, which seems to imply that you think they aren't intelligent enough to understand what they have voted for. I once again reject that assertion. I remain convinced that the people who voted for the newsgroup understood what was being proposed and voted for that. Whether or not what was being proposed was how "real" journals do things is irrelevant; if people understood the proposal and get what they thought they were getting, then the vote was completely legitimate. Do you have some evidence to back up your claim that people are not getting what they expected to get? If so, could you perhaps present it to us? Thus far, you seem to be the only person who is vehemently protesting the fact that people aren't going to get what they voted for. Also thus far, you have done little to prove this assertion. -- Jonathan Kamens USnail: MIT Project Athena 11 Ashford Terrace jik@Athena.MIT.EDU Allston, MA 02134 Office: 617-253-8085 Home: 617-782-0710