[CPN] Publication-Related Issues

[Michel Laurin]

Well, not an assistant for Jacques. Another editor of vertebrate 
paleontology, who could take over the load for many of the contributions 
that Jacques has to edit, that would be useful, I think.

Michel

On 16/11/11 22:00, de Queiroz, Kevin wrote:
> I don't know that we need more editors.  Phil and I have made substantial progress on the contributions that we are handling, and a lot of the delays are related to authors not revising their contributions in a timely manner.  One thing that might help is if we could hire an assistant for Jacques : ).
>
> Kevin
>
>
> On 11/16/11 10:43 AM, "David Marjanovic"<david.marjanovic at gmx.at>  wrote:
>
> In case it matters (I'm not a Council member), I wholeheartedly support
> the call for more editors for the Companion Volume. It is evident that
> the work is way too much for just three people.
>
> Unfortunately, I don't think I can volunteer myself...
>
>>   Dear Colleagues,
>>
>>   I am concerned about several issues on which I would like your views.
>>   We have a proposal on the table about the rank of species, and we are
>>   likely to have others. It seems impractical to try to resolve these
>>   things by email.
> I don't understand why. E-mail has several advantages over a meatspace
> meeting: it allows us
> -- to cite sources and even link to them without further ado;
> -- to look everything up and not just what we happen to carry around in
> our heads -- off-of-the-top-of-my-head comments are no way to deal with
> serious, detailed proposals to amend the PhyloCode;
> -- and, more trivially, to "speak" all at the same time but still
> "listen" to everyone. This last one would stay an issue even in Skype.
>
> Instead of e-mail, a forum (bulletin board) or even the comments section
> of a blog (which is almost the same as a forum) may work at least as
> well. The best discussions I have are all on blogs.
>
> My financial situation, and thus ability to attend a meeting even in
> Berkeley, may greatly improve by January, but nothing is fixed yet.
>
>>   2. In the intervening time I would suggest circulating a call for
>>   proposals in the systematic community that would suggest any changes
>>   in the substance or wording of the PhyloCode, prior to its
>>   publication; no further changes would be entertained for a period of
>>   "x" (x to be determined) years afterward. These proposals would have
>>   a deadline at least a month before the meeting. The CPN would
>>   consider them at that meeting.
> Fine, if we include a plea to read the entire PhyloCode before writing a
> proposal, and a threat that proposals whose authors clearly haven't read
> the PhyloCode will be unceremoniously ignored. :-)
> _______________________________________________
> CPN mailing list
> CPN at listserv.ohio.edu
> http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CPN mailing list
> CPN at listserv.ohio.edu
> http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn
>


-- 
UMR 7207
Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle
Batiment de Géologie	
Case postale 48
43 rue Buffon
F-75231 Paris cedex 05
FRANCE
http://tolweb.org/notes/?note_id=3669