[vsnet-chat 7661] Re: Quasi-anonymous and rejected papers in arXiv

[Wolfgang Renz]

> I am both confused and concerned by the appearance of 
> a scientific paper in arXiv where the journal editor in
> question confirms the paper was rejected and where the 
> the author doesn't appear to include either a physical 
> or an email address or even their full name.
> Martin Nicholson
> Shropshire, UK

You are very fast in making claims, but regularly miss to give
hard facts or proof for your claims. You still owe me the proof
for your claim that one can find "hundreds of thousands" novae
when one joins you as leader of the "Daventry Nova Survey"
via pay per scope time imaging back in 2005.
How high is your nova discovery count today ? 0, right ?

Many papers on arXiv don't get published for many month, some
get published in other journals than originally intended, some don't
get published at all as they don't pass the refereeing. Some do
even submit papers to arXiv without the real intend to get them
published somewhere.
Please, prove that the paper was rejected irrevocablly and if yes
is not indented to get published somewhere else and don't make
just such claims.

Where is it written that an author MUST include either a physical 
or an email address in to a book or article ?
None of my books and also many articles don't have a physical or
an email address at all. These data are known to the publisher but
IMO must not be made public to everybody.
Everybody can view the email address of at least one submitter
of every arXiv article. One must just register. So you do have ac-
cess to JG's email address. And you know JG's physical address
from his older papers. So what is here quasi-anonymous ?

Please, stop pretending confusion and concern just to give an
other irrelevant and bland side blow to JG.


Please, stop your personal war against JG on public email lists.
Its sad enough how you do handle JG and others you don't like on
your hate blogs and web sites.  Nobody wants to read such emails
with personal attacs or side blows anymore. Neither from you nor
from JG.

Wolfgang

-- 
Wolfgang Renz, Karlsruhe, Germany



References:
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Martin Nicholson" <newbinaries at yahoo.co.uk>
To: <baavss-alert at yahoogroups.com> and at least 10 other email lists
Sent: Friday, January 28, 2005 5:55 PM
Subject: [baavss-alert] Partners required for exciting new astronomical project!

> I am looking for between 4 and 12 keen and committed amateur
> astronomers to take part in an exciting new astronomical project.
> 
> You do not need to own your own telescope to get involved although
> some previous experience of practical astronomy would be an ad-
> vantage.  You will be given remote Internet access to a Takahashi
> E250 with an SBIG ST8XE CCD (1530x1020 pixels) on a Para-
> mount robotic mount. This high quality professional observatory
> equipment is located at high altitude in the darkest part of New
> Mexico.
> 
> It is intended that the Daventry Nova Survey will take 60 second
> CCD images of all parts of the sky close to the galactic plane.
> This technique will comfortably reach magnitude 16 and since a
> nova will increase in brightness by anything between 7 and 19
> magnitudes stars previously in the magnitude range 23 to 35 can
> come into range. There are lots of potential targets around - quite
> literally billions.
> 
> My suspicion is that the percentage of novae in the range 12 to 16
> that get reported is extremely close to zero yet the expected number
> of such objects, based on a detailed literature search, appears
> to be in the hundreds of thousands.
> 
> If you would like to be considered for the team please contact me
> with brief details of your previous astronomical experience at
> newbinaries at yahoo.co.uk
> 
> Martin Nicholson
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://ooruri.kusastro.kyoto-u.ac.jp/pipermail/vsnet-chat/attachments/20101229/c14913c0/attachment.htm>