I absolutely agree with Michael - the list would die without Stevan
Tony
-----Original Message-----
From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [mailto:AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG] On Behalf Of Michael Eisen
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2008 7:26 AM
To: AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG
Subject: Re: Call for a vote of nonconfidence in the moderator of the AmSci Forum
I disagree with Stevan often. He can be infuriating. He has a tendency
to bloviate.
Nonetheless - he has been a FANTASTIC moderator of this list. I have
sent off many posts that have criticized Stevan directly, and he has
never failed to send them to the group. I can think of no other list
that has not just lasted for 10 years, but kept up a high level of
discourse and relevance.
Stevan has my complete confidence. The list would die without him.
On Oct 7, 2008, at 5:37 AM, Stevan Harnad wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 7, 2008 at 3:37 AM, C.Oppenheim_at_lboro.ac.uk
> <C.Oppenheim_at_lboro.ac.uk> wrote:
>
>> I totally support Jean-Claude's view.
>
> I can only repeat what I said before:
>
> (1) I am happy to put an end to my 10-year moderatorship of the
> American Scientist Open Access Forum and hand it over to someone else
> who is willing to do it, but only if it is requested by a plurality of
> the membership, not if it is merely requested by a few dissatisfied
> members.
>
> (2) The moderator's role is to filter postings, approving the relevant
> ones, and rejecting the off-topic or ad-hominem ones.
>
> (3) Apart from that, the moderator has no special status or authority
> (other than what may accrue from the substance of his postings), and
> may post *exactly* as any other poster may post, including the posting
> of quotes, comments, critiques, elaborations, rebuttals *and
> summaries*.
>
> By my count, there have not been many votes one way or the other, but
> of the few votes there have been, more seem to be expressing
> confidence in my moderatorship than those that are calling for me to
> be replaced.
>
> I have also been accused of of censorship, by both Jean-Claude and
> Sally, the charge being subsequently rescinded. If there are doubts
> about whether I can be trusted to post or tally the votes -- or, more
> important, if we are to spare the Forum the bandwidth of votes
> appearing instead of OA substance -- I am also quite happy to direct
> the votes to be sent to a trusted 3rd party for tallying, if that is
> the wish of the Forum.
>
> Stevan Harnad
>
>>
>> Charles
>>
>>
>> Professor Charles Oppenheim
>> Head
>> Department of Information Science
>> Loughborough University
>> Loughborough
>> Leics LE11 3TU
>>
>> Tel 01509-223065
>> Fax 01509 223053
>> e mail c.oppenheim_at_lboro.ac.uk
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: American Scientist Open Access Forum
>> [mailto:AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-
>> FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG] On
>> Behalf Of Jean-Claude Guédon
>> Sent: 06 October 2008 19:00
>> To: AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG
>> Subject: Re: American Scientist Open Access Forum settings
>>
>> What I note is that my messages sometimes appear back very late and
>> I wonder
>> why. It is this detail which caused my recent angry reaction.
>>
>> While we are on technical matters, I would appreciate two things
>> from this
>> moderator/actor:
>>
>> 1. That he should refrain from ever summarizing somebody's words.
>> We are all
>> versed enough in the art of reading to be able to survive without
>> this
>> doubtful form of help. Besides, list moderators are not mentors or
>> paternal
>> figures. When the summary ends up distorting the original message, it
>> becomes reprehensible;
>>
>> 2. Since the moderator also intervenes as member in this list, he
>> should
>> make clear which of his interventions are moderating interventions
>> and which
>> ones are participations in discussions. In the latter case,
>> summaries should
>> be avoided.
>>
>> I realize that Peter Suber manages a blog and not a list, but I
>> really like
>> the way in which he carefully delineates the pieces of news he
>> wants to
>> convey, and how he announces his own comments. This is a very good
>> model to
>> follow. I would also add that Peter Suber refrains from using
>> judgements and
>> terms that occasionally raise the ire of readers such as me. When I
>> read a
>> sentence such as "Many silly, mindless things have been standing in
>> the way
>> of the optimal and inevitable" (Sept 28), I ask myself if the
>> silly, and
>> mindless characterizations belong to this context. I also wonder
>> whether
>> the "optimal and inevitable" are objective, neutral terms. On Sept.
>> 30th, in
>> answering to me, Stevan made free to add: "What on earth does this
>> mean?".
>> Was that useful? In short, Stevan acts as if there was one truth, one
>> defender of this truth (himself). The list is "his" list and, on
>> it, he can
>> berate people at will (What on earth does this mean?). And then if
>> you
>> resist and respond with a few equivalents to "What on earth...
>> etc.", then
>> you are accused of flaming, being vituperative, or whatever.
>>
>> I wonder how the same individual, at will and arbitrarily, can
>> assume the
>> trappings of a moderator or a debate without even making sure that
>> people
>> know which role is at work. It troubles me and, I assume, it should
>> trouble
>> many people.
>>
>> This said, Stevan has also done excellent work in setting up this
>> list and
>> maintaining it. This too should be recognized openly and loudly.
>> But there
>> is room for improvement.
>>
>> Jean-Claude Guédon
>>
>> PS I will not come back on this point. I leave the floor to Stevan
>> or any
>> other person willing to defend his present position as both actor and
>> moderator.
>>
>> Le lundi 06 octobre 2008 à 13:23 -0400, Stevan Harnad a écrit :
>>
>> Whether you do or do not receive copies of your own postings depends
>> on the setting you chose when you signed onto the American Scientist
>> Open Access Forum. I have checked Leslie's, Sally's and Jean-Claude's
>> settings. I note that both Leslie's and Sally's were set to "No
>> acknowledgements [NOACK NOREPRO]" -- the listserv's default option. I
>> have now changed them both to "Receive copy of own postings [NOACK
>> REPRO]". Jean-Claude's setting was already "Receive copy of own
>> postings [NOACK REPRO]".
>>
>> If you are not receiving copies of your own postings, you can modify
>> your settings at
>> http://listserver.sigmaxi.org/sc/wa.exe?SUBED1=american-scientist-open-access-forum&A=1
>>
>> Stevan Harnad
>> Moderator
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
>> Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2008 11:29:09 -0400 (EDT)
>> Subject: RE: Jean-Claude
>> =?iso-8859-1?Q?Gu=E9don_is_wrong=2C_and_so_is_Zinath_Rehana?=
>> From: "Leslie Chan" <chan_at_utsc.utoronto.ca>
>> To: "American Scientist Open Access Forum"
>> <AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG>
>>
>> This has been a source of confusion for me in the past. It appears
>> that
>> the listserv software is setup in such a way that the senders do not
>> receive a copy of his or her own postings. Is this the case,
>> Stevan, and
>> can this be changed to avoid future confusion?
>>
>> Leslie
>>
>>> Apologies - I have no idea why my own original posting on the
>>> matter di=
>> d
>>> not
>>> appear on my own computer
>>>
>>> Sally
>>>
>>>
>>> Sally Morris
>>> Consultant, Morris Associates (Publishing Consultancy)
>>> South House, The Street
>>> Clapham, Worthing, West Sussex BN13 3UU, UK
>>> Tel: +44(0)1903 871286
>>> Fax: +44(0)8701 202806
>>> Email: sally_at_morris-assocs.demon.co.uk
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: American Scientist Open Access Forum
>>> [mailto:AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-
>>> FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG] On
>>> Behalf Of Stevan Harnad
>>> Sent: 06 October 2008 15:08
>>> To: AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG
>>> Subject: Re: Jean-Claude Gu=E9don is wrong, and so is Zinath Rehana
>>>
>>> On 10/6/08, Sally Morris (Morris Associates)
>>> <sally_at_morris-assocs.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> List readers will have seen the positive comments on Stevan's
>>>> moderati=
>> on
>>> of
>>>> the list
>>>>
>>>> I am worried, however, about whether negative comments are being
>>>> censored.
>>>> Mine was
>>>
>>> May I suggest that before resorting to accusations of censorship, as
>>> Jean-Claude Guedon did, you consult the American Scientist Open
>>> Access
>>> Forum's archive
>>> http://amsci-forum.amsci.org/archives/American-Scientist-Open-Access-Fo=
>> rum.h
>>> tml
>>> where you will see, as Jean-Claude did, that all your postings have
>>> appeared. Nothing has been rejected except another inappropriate
>>> posting by Zinath Rehana.
>>>
>>> Please distinguish the fact that I am often critical of your
>>> postings
>>> in my postings (as you often are of mine) from the question of
>>> whether
>>> or not they appear. They all appear, and when I do a critique,
>>> just as
>>> when you do a critique, I am merely a poster to the Forum, like
>>> anyone
>>> else.
>>>
>>> I will not, however, approve further postings accusing me of
>>> censorship from posters who have simply not bothered to check (or
>>> have
>>> not noticed) that their postings have appeared. This entire
>>> "censorship" thread has already cost the Forum a number of long-term
>>> members who have quit the list because they do not have the time for
>>> these off-topic exchanges. If you wish to inquire about a posting,
>>> send me an email. The Forum's bandwidth is not intended for this
>>> sort
>>> of thing.
>>>
>>> Stevan Harnad
>>>
>>>> Sally Morris
>>>> Consultant, Morris Associates (Publishing Consultancy)
>>>> South House, The Street
>>>> Clapham, Worthing, West Sussex BN13 3UU, UK
>>>> Tel: +44(0)1903 871286
>>>> Fax: +44(0)8701 202806
>>>>
>>>> Email: sally_at_morris-assocs.demon.co.uk
>>>>
>>>> _____
>>>>
>>>> From: American Scientist Open Access Forum
>>>> [mailto:AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-
>>>> FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG] O=
>> n
>>>> Behalf Of Subbiah Arunachalam
>>>> Sent: 06 October 2008 04:47
>>>> To: AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG
>>>> Subject: Re: Jean-Claude Gu=E9don is wrong, and so is Zinath Rehana
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I would say the same thing as Alma Swan and Barbara Kirsop, but
>>>> being =
>> a
>>>> native speakers of English, they have said it far more
>>>> effectively tha=
>> n
>>>> I
>>>> could.
>>>>
>>>> Stevan, you are doing a great job. Do not get distracted from
>>>> your pat=
>> h
>>>> because of a few detractors. Your postings are very educative and
>>>> we i=
>> n
>>> the
>>>> developing world are greatly indebted to you for your tireless
>>>> efforts
>>>> to
>>>> democratise knowledge and open up the flow of information.
>>>>
>>>> Arun
>>>> [Subbiah Arunachalam]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----
>>>> From: Ept <ept_at_BIOSTRAT.DEMON.CO.UK>
>>>> To: AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG
>>>> Sent: Friday, 3 October, 2008 18:17:30
>>>> Subject: Re: Jean-Claude Gu=E9don is wrong, and so is Zinath Rehana
>>>>
>>>> Surely all readers of this List will be grateful to the moderator
>>>> for
>>>> sparing us this objectionable posting and I subscribe absolutely
>>>> to th=
>> e
>>>> sentiments so well expressed by Alma Swan. The role of a
>>>> Moderator is =
>> no
>>>> easy path to follow and surely leads to turbulence within this
>>>> highly
>>> vocal
>>>> and dedicated community, each with their different backgrounds
>>>> and own
>>>> professional agendas. But as a person working in 'development',
>>>> I for
>>>> one
>>>> am grateful to Stevan for his frequent reiteration of the basic
>>>> points=
>> ,
>>>> as
>>> I
>>>> am sure are newcomers to the List. As a prime mover in the
>>>> evolutionar=
>> y
>>>> process towards free access to essential research, his tireless
>>>> effort=
>> s
>>> are
>>>> well appreciated by the information-starved world.
>>>>
>>>> Barbara Kirsop
>>>>
>>>> Electronic Publishing Trust for Development
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> Jean-Claude Guédon
>> Université de Montréal
Received on Tue Oct 07 2008 - 16:40:28 BST