Re: Etymology of "Eprint"

From: Albert Henderson <NobleStation_at_COMPUSERVE.COM>
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2000 22:57:44 -0400

on 8/22/00 Marvin, INTERNET:physNOSPAMchem_at_telocity.com wrote
        
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Fytton Rowland" <J.F.Rowland_at_LBORO.AC.UK>
> To: <AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG>
> Sent: Tuesday, August 22, 2000 7:15 AM
> Subject: Re: Etymology of "Eprint"
> <snip>.
> >
> > But in the USA thirty or so years ago an effort was made to
> organise a
> > preprint exchange, which really did distribute paper (photo)copies of
> > as-yet unaccepted typescripts. It eventually collapsed for two reasons:
> > many scientists objected to the distribution of non-refereed material as
> > debasing the currency; and the costs involved, especially postage costs
> for
> > pritned materials in large quantity, became too high. I think there was
> > also a feeling that it created a privileged class of people who were on
> the
> > mailing list, leaving others unable to get hold of the material so early.
> >
> > Yours, Fytton.
> >
> Specifically, this was an activity of NIH to foster communication between
> grantees working in a common area. As I recall, it failed because it turned
> out to be politically impossible to keep the distribution to a chosen group.
>

        The official reasons given by Eugene A Confrey (1966) were:

                First, the original purpose of the experiment
                has been achieved. the IEG concept is workable,
                if the chosen research area is focused to an
                easily described and identifiable research
                phenomenon or problem ...

                Second, the rapid growth of IEG in the last two
                years has now reached the threshold limit for
                the NIH facilities ...


Albert Henderson
Editor, PUBLISHING RESEARCH QUARTERLY 1994-2000
<70244.1532_at_compuserve.com>
Received on Mon Jan 24 2000 - 19:17:43 GMT