I don't want my suggestion to be interpreted as impugning anyone's
character, but I do have a problem with the way the job has been done. The
Moderator and I don't see eye-to-eye, which is OK by me. However, whenever
I have posted, he has immediately posted his (usually strong) response,
which makes it harder for readers to form independent opinions. I've stayed
on nevertheless, but I can't help noticing that others who used to disagree
with the Moderator seem to have dropped out. That can hardly be good for a
fruitful discussion.
I'm not opposed to change for opposition's sake. I'm opposed to headlong
change that may cause irreparable damage to a generally useful means of
publication. That is why I've advocated that there should be a variety of
experiments, each of which takes into account the differences in how various
fields of inquiry operate. A one-size-fits-all solution to the inadequacies
of one or more specialties can't be the answer.
----- Original Message -----
From: Charles Oppenheim <C.Oppenheim_at_LBORO.AC.UK>
To: <AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG>
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2000 5:34 AM
Subject: Re: Rename Forum: Author Auto-Archiving Forum
> I would be sorry to lose Stevan as moderator. He keeps the discussion
> flowing along, and I don't see a problem with a moderator with strong
> views, so long as (s)he doesn't actually stop people posting messages that
> (s)he happens to disagree with.
>
> Professor Charles Oppenheim
> Dept of Information Science
> Loughborough University
> Loughborough
> Leics LE11 3TU
>
> Tel 01509-223065
> Fax 01509-223053
>
Received on Mon Jan 24 2000 - 19:17:43 GMT