Having been abroad during the time this controversy began I have had to scan the dozens of messages about Stevan's monitoring of this listserv. I rarely comment on open access but feel that Stevan Harnad has provided us all a remarkable education. One day I am confident he will deservedly be nominated for a prize equivalent to the Nobel for his perseverance and patience in dealing with these issues.
Suggestions for improving the listserv procedures are always to be welcomed. But to suggest that anyone else would be more effective is nonsense.
Having dealt with hundreds of editors in my career I can say I have never encountered one that was more dedicated and knowledgeable in the areas he has tackled. He is indeed Mr. Open Access.
__________________________________________________
Eugene Garfield, PhD. email: garfield_at_codex.cis.upenn.edu
home page: www.eugenegarfield.org
Tel: 215-243-2205 Fax 215-387-1266
-----Original Message-----
From: American Scientist Open Access Forum [mailto:AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG] On Behalf Of Derek Law
Sent: Tuesday, October 07, 2008 1:12 PM
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 read but don't usually post to this list - but i'm finally goaded to. The list is really useful; stevan is unique and to be cherished even when one disagrees with him. I can think of no one who would put up with this nonsense. I want two votes. One to support Stevan and one to have the moderator close this thread.
It's like the besieged settlers under attack who circle the wagons and start shooting inwards!
Derk Law
-----Original Message-----
From: Tony Hey <Tony.Hey_at_MICROSOFT.COM>
Sent: 07 October 2008 15:54
To: AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG <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 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 - 23:17:35 BST