Tim Tyler  wrote:
> Material is reviewed on usenet as well.  You get to see who
> is critical of the theory - and often their reasoning about why
> it is wrong. 
> Reviewers can't suppress publication of the original messages though.
> That's a very positive thing - it means nobody gets censored.

JE:-
Peer review transparency does not exist at the moment.
If usenet discussion was employed by referee's to discuss
and decide the worth of a paper for publication where
the author of the paper remained anonymous and the 
board of review's decision remained final, then political
manipulation, if any, would become transparent. Also,
the people involved and the general public would be
able appraise the process. Peer review is something like
a Parliament where the decision process must be transparent.
Usnet in general and sbe in particular are well placed
to experiment with this concept. This is why I cannot
understand your neutrality re: optional sbe electronically
published peer reviewed papers.

Regards,

John Edser
Independent Researcher

PO Box 266
Church Pt
NSW 2105
Australia

edser{at}tpg.com.au
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 11/17/04 9:38:23 AM