Re: Let's act like grown ups, please! (was RE: An address if desired)

[MKIRKALDY@aol.com]

In a message dated Wed, 18 Sep 2002 7:16:19 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
tholtz@geol.umd.edu writes:

< Space is limited in Nature and Science, and indeed any journal.  Yes, 
sometimes I do scratch my head and wonder why a given paper was published when 
another (perhaps superior) paper was rejected.  Yes, these two have indeed 
published works that, in my opinion, wasted the readers time and the
ink used to print it. >

Nature _is_ interested in putting out a journal which people will actually buy 
and read.  I have been on two Nature Reader Panels:

     After reading each week's print issue, simply 
     return to the site and login to rate each article
     you read for interest and ease of understanding. 
     There's also space to comment on each article if 
     you want to say more. We're not asking you to read
     each issue cover-to-cover - rather, we want to find
     out more about your normal reading habits and what
     you find most interesting as you browse the journal.

     Our goal at Nature is to make the journal serve
     its diverse readership as effectively as possible,
     providing authoritative, informative and enjoyable
     articles across a wide range of scientific topics. 

So, perhaps I am to blame for the rejection of papers because I was not 
interested in the topics? :-)

< If you have a cogent argument to send to the journal, than please do so.  I 
can predict, however, that *if* you get a response it will be of the "we have 
insufficient space to publish responses to all the papers printed in this 
journal" variety.>
Science of course published the note that the DML was the source of the 
_Megapnosaurus_ announcement.

Mary