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: <scs.671464069@hela.iti.org> <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
