[Taxacom] Important note Re: two names online published - one new species

Stephen Thorpe stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Sun Jan 24 17:37:24 CST 2016


If you had read my posts properly, Mike, you would already know the answer to that! Which came first? Zootaxa or Amendment?

Stephen


--------------------------------------------
On Mon, 25/1/16, Michael A. Ivie <mivie at montana.edu> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Important note Re: two names online published - one new species
 To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 Received: Monday, 25 January, 2016, 12:23 PM
 
 Stephen,
 
 Why is it not more likely, in the face of first person
 testimony from 
 those present, that Zootaxa was optimized TO THE AMENDMENT,
 and not the 
 other way around, which you cling to as a drowning man to a
 piece of 
 styrofoam?  Seems to me that a publisher that looks at
 the amendment, 
 and sets their journal to conform to it should be put up on
 a pedestal 
 as an example to the world, not accused of nefarious insider
 trading.
 
 Mike
 
 On 1/24/2016 2:26 PM, Stephen Thorpe wrote:
 > Other publishers were no doubt consulted to some
 extent, yes. Neverthless, we have ended up in a situation
 whereby the electronic amendment is optimised to the Zootaxa
 publishing model, and many other publishers fall into a
 messy and indeterminate basket. Note that the Zootaxa
 publishing model wasn't created so as to be fully Code
 compliant with the electronic amendment. The Zootaxa model
 predates the amendment by several years. At the very least,
 Zhang had inside knowledge of what was going to result from
 the amendment well ahead of time, and thereby had an
 advantage over other publishers.
 >
 > These are facts Frank. I cannot be wrong. Not unless
 you can offer a convincing alternative explanation as to why
 the electronic amendment fits Zootaxa hand in glove, while
 other publishers are left in a gray zone. Well?
 >
 > Stephen
 >
 > --------------------------------------------
 > On Mon, 25/1/16, Frank T. Krell <Frank.Krell at dmns.org>
 wrote:
 >
 >   Subject: RE: [Taxacom] Important note
 Re: two names online published - one    new
 species
 >   To: "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>,
 "deepreef at bishopmuseum.org"
 <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org>,
 "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu"
 <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>,
 "'Doug Yanega'" <dyanega at ucr.edu>
 >   Cc: "'engel'" <msengel at ku.edu>
 >   Received: Monday, 25 January, 2016,
 10:16 AM
 >   
 >   To you. But you are
 >   wrong. You won't be convinced
 otherwise, so it is
 >   useless to repeat that other
 publishers were consulted
 >   etc.
 >   You believe what you want anyway.
 >   Frank
 >   
 >   -----Original Message-----
 >   From: Stephen Thorpe [mailto:stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz]
 >   
 >   Sent: Sunday, January 24, 2016 2:11
 PM
 >   To: Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>;
 >   deepreef at bishopmuseum.org;
 >   taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu;
 >   'Doug Yanega' <dyanega at ucr.edu>;
 >   Frank T. Krell <Frank.Krell at dmns.org>
 >   Cc: 'engel' <msengel at ku.edu>
 >   Subject: RE: [Taxacom] Important note
 Re: two
 >   names online published - one new
 species
 >   
 >   Frank,
 >   
 >   Zootaxa
 >   is very relevant to this whole thread
 and wider
 >   discussion.
 >   
 >   Fact (1): there
 >   are significant problems with the
 electronic amendment (no,
 >   the sky isn't falling down, people
 aren't running
 >   for the hills in droves, etc., but in
 the context of
 >   zoological nomenclature there are
 significant problems),
 >   none of which affect the Zootaxa
 publishing model.
 >   
 >   Fact (2): the owner of Zootaxa
 >   is a prominent member of the ICZN who
 had a significant part
 >   to play in the development of the
 electronic amendment.
 >   
 >   Now, you can claim, if you
 >   really want to, that facts (1) and (2)
 are independent,
 >   coincidence, or whatever, but to me it
 looks like a classic
 >   case of a COI. The best interests of
 zoological nomenclature
 >   as a whole are not necessarily the
 best interests of Zootaxa
 >   in particular. You make yourself look
 foolish if you refuse
 >   to acknowledge the problem here. You
 might claim that the
 >   COI is outweighed by other more
 important factors (like,
 >   maybe, keeping the ICZN viable and
 running), but it is
 >   really self-evident that the
 electronic amendment was
 >   optimised for the Zootaxa publishing
 model and to hell with
 >   any other alternative. There is no
 room for doubt regarding
 >   the Code compliance of Zootaxa
 articles, but articles from
 >   many other publishers are very much in
 the "how liberal
 >   do you feel" bucket, and it isn't
 going to be long
 >   before taxonomists start renaming taxa
 already named by
 >   others in these dubiously valid
 publications (just like
 >   Scott Thomson renames taxa from
 Australasian Journal of
 >   Herpetology). All this is not good! It
 isn't a corrupt
 >   conspiracy, or anything of the sort.
 It is just not good for
 >   zoological nomenclature, not good for
 taxonomy, and not good
 >   for science.
 >   
 >   Stephen
 >   
 >   --------------------------------------------
 >   On Mon, 25/1/16, Frank T. Krell <Frank.Krell at dmns.org>
 >   wrote:
 >   
 >    Subject: RE:
 >   [Taxacom] Important note Re: two names
 online published -
 >   one    new species
 >    To: "Stephen
 >   Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>,
 >   "deepreef at bishopmuseum.org"
 >   <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org>,
 >   "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu"
 >   <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>,
 >   "'Doug Yanega'" <dyanega at ucr.edu>
 >    Cc: "'engel'" <msengel at ku.edu>
 >    Received: Monday, 25 January, 2016, 9:40
 AM
 >    
 >    As expected.
 >    Still being pragmatic.
 >    And
 >    Zootaxa again, out of context, but in
 your
 >   mind all the  time.
 >    
 >   
 >   Frank
 >    
 >    -----Original
 >   Message-----
 >    From: Stephen Thorpe
 >   [mailto:stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz]
 >    
 >    Sent: Sunday, January 24,
 >   2016 1:37 PM
 >    To: deepreef at bishopmuseum.org;
 >    'Stephen Thorpe' <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>;
 >   taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu;
 >   'Doug Yanega' <dyanega at ucr.edu>;
 >   Frank T. Krell <Frank.Krell at dmns.org>
 >    Cc: 'engel' <msengel at ku.edu>
 >    Subject: RE: [Taxacom] Important note Re:
 >   two  names online published - one
 new species
 >    
 >    Frank,
 >    
 >    That is
 >    a pretty darn liberal
 >   reinterpretation of:
 >    
 >   
 >   8.5.3.1. The entry in the
 >    Official Register
 >   of Zoological Nomenclature must give
 the  name and Internet
 >   address of an organization other than
 the  publisher that
 >   is intended to permanently archive the
 work  in a manner
 >   that preserves the content and layout,
 and is  capable of
 >   doing so. This information is not
 required to  appear in
 >   the work itself.
 >    
 >    If we
 >   allow such dizzying levels of
 liberality,  then it is
 >   pretty much "anything goes"!
 Besides,  publishing
 >   with a publisher that still prints
 hard copies  effectively
 >   IS archiving, but the Code is clearly
 not  concerned with
 >   "effectively", and it just opens
 up  a huge scope
 >   for everyone to disagree on the
 interpretation  of the
 >   Code, thereby causing instability and
 nomenclatural  chaos
 >   (none of which affects Zootaxa...)
 >    
 >    Cheers,
 >    
 >   
 >   Stephen
 >    
 >   
 >   --------------------------------------------
 >    On Mon, 25/1/16, Frank T. Krell <Frank.Krell at dmns.org>
 >    wrote:
 >    
 >    
 >   Subject: RE:
 >    [Taxacom] Important note Re:
 >   two names online published - 
 one    new species
 >     To: "deepreef at bishopmuseum.org"
 >    <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org>,
 >    "'Stephen Thorpe'" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>,
 >   "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu"
 >    <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>,
 >    "'Doug Yanega'" <dyanega at ucr.edu>
 >     Cc: "'engel'" <msengel at ku.edu>
 >     Received: Monday, 25 January,
 2016, 9:31
 >   AM
 >     
 >     I would see the
 >   criteria
 >     for availability more
 liberally.
 >   Publishing  with a
 publisher  that archives all its
 >   publications anyway  is an
 intention to  archive.
 >     Being
 >    pragmatic.
 >     
 >     Frank
 >    
 >   
 >     
 >     Dr Frank
 >    T. Krell
 >     Curator of
 >   Entomology
 >     Commissioner, International
 >   Commission on  Zoological
 Nomenclature  Chair, ICZN
 >   ZooBank  Committee 
 Department of Zoology  Denver Museum
 >   of Nature &  Science
 >     2001 Colorado
 >   Boulevard
 >     Denver, CO 80205-5798 USA
 >     Frank.Krell at dmns.org
 >     
 >     Phone: (+1) (303)
 >    370-8244
 >     Fax: (+1) (303)
 >   331-6492
 >     http://www.dmns.org/science/museum-scientists/frank-krell
 >     lab page: http://www.dmns.org/krell-lab
 >     
 >     Test your powers of
 >     observation in The
 International Exhibition
 >   of  Sherlock  Holmes, open
 until January 31. And prepare
 >   your  palate for
 >     Chocolate: The
 >   Exhibition,
 >    opening February 12.
 >     
 >     The
 >   
 >   Denver Museum of Nature
 >     & Science
 >    salutes the citizens of metro Denver for
 >   helping fund  arts, culture and
 science through their
 >   support  of the  Scientific
 and Cultural Facilities
 >   District (SCFD).
 >     
 >     
 >     
 >     
 >    
 >   -----Original
 >    Message-----
 >     From: Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu]
 >     On Behalf Of Richard Pyle
 >   
 >   
 >    Sent: Sunday,
 >     January
 >   24, 2016 12:42 PM
 >     To: 'Stephen
 >     Thorpe'
 >    <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>;
 >     taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu;
 >     'Doug Yanega' <dyanega at ucr.edu>
 >     Cc: 'engel' <msengel at ku.edu>
 >     Subject: Re: [Taxacom]
 Important note Re:
 >    two  names online published - one
 new
 >   species
 >     
 >     I can confirm
 >   that the
 >    Archive was added to  this record
 >   at 2016-01-23
 >    12:21:46.330 UTC, by the
 >   same  login account that
 created  the original
 >   registration.  Following the
 principle that  the work
 >   becomes available when  all
 requirements are  fulfilled
 >   (see my previous email reply  to
 Laurent on this  list),
 >   and assuming all other 
 requirements for publication  are
 >   met, my interpretation  would be
 that the date of
 >   publication for purposes of 
 priority should be 23
 >   January  2016. If numerous copies
 of  the paper edition
 >   were  simultaneously obtainable
 prior to  this date, and
 >   if the  paper edition is in
 compliance with  the Code for
 >   published  works printed on
 paper, then the date  of
 >   publication for  purposes of
 priority should be
 >   interpreted as the date on  which
 numerous copies of the
 >   printed edition were 
 simultaneously obtainable (see
 >   Art.
 >    
 >    21.9).
 >     
 >     What is, or is
 >    not
 >     visible through the
 >   ZooBank website is  irrelevant.
 The Code  makes reference
 >   to content in the  Official
 Register of  Zoological
 >   Nomenclature, only a  subset of
 which is visible  on the
 >   website itself.  Future 
 versions of the ZooBank  website
 >   (pending development
 >    support) will include
 >   more  robust and publicly
 visible  documentation of when
 >   specific  items were added
 or  amended.
 >    
 >   
 >     Aloha,
 >     Rich
 >     
 >     >
 >   
 >   -----Original Message-----
 >     > From:
 >    Stephen Thorpe [mailto:stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz]
 >     > Sent: Sunday, January 24,
 2016 9:25
 >   AM  > To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu;
 >   Doug Yanega  > Cc: deepreef at bishopmuseum.org;
 >   engel  > Subject: Re:
 [Taxacom] Important  note Re:
 >   two  names online published
 -  >  one new species
 >   >  >  Doug, 
 >  > I'm not  sure that
 >   this was  at all helpful! The
 addition of the  archive
 >   > info  isn't date
 stamped  (at least not for
 >   public view). Now  the
 record  > misleadingly looks
 >   like valid online  first 
 publication on 4 January
 >   2016:
 >     >
 >    http://zoobank.org/References/07554C01-DEC3-4080-A337-B1F46BC9070F
 >     >
 >     > As far as I
 >    know,
 >     the print edition may
 >   not be
 >    published yet (all we  > know is
 >   that it is the January
 >    2016 print  issue,
 >   which could be  > published
 in  February for all we
 >   know). So there may be no way to 
 >  determine the true
 >   date of availability  for the new
 names.
 >   
 >   Even if we  > can get  a
 definitive date on the hard
 >   copy, this doesn't help  much,
 unless it is on or
 >   before 4 January 2016.
 >     >
 >     > Stephen
 >     >
 >     >
 >    
 >   
 >   --------------------------------------------
 >     > On Sun, 24/1/16, Doug
 Yanega <dyanega at ucr.edu>
 >     wrote:
 >     >
 >    
 >    >  Subject:
 >     [Taxacom] Important note
 >   
 >   Re: two names online published -
 >     
 >     > one new species
 >    
 >   >
 >     To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
 >     "engel" <msengel at ku.edu>
 >     >  Received: Sunday, 24
 January,
 >   2016,
 >    7:34  PM  >  > 
 I sent a
 >   note to the authors of  the 
 >  Kinzelbachilla paper
 >   (who had not  > 
 been  CCed before as Mike Engel had),
 >   and they said they  have 
 fixed  > the ZooBank record
 >   so it  now includes the 
 archive. Accordingly,  for
 >   > the  public record, if 
 we follow the  guideline as
 >   Rich suggested,  all 
 >  of  the  criteria for
 >   availability have now been
 fulfilled  for  the  name in
 >   their  work.
 >     >
 >    
 >   >  Most interesting of all,
 however, if  that they
 >   disagree  regarding  >
 these  two papers  describing
 >   the same taxon, despite both
 being  from  >
 >   essentially the same type of 
 amber deposit:
 >     >
 >     >
 >    
 >    "By the way, it is not
 >   the same thing, the eyes, for 
 instance, are  >
 >   strikingly  different."
 >     >
 >     >  In other words,
 >    this
 >   may not be a matter  of competing
 for  priority,  >
 >   after  all, as Hans had
 originally supposed.
 >     >
 >     
 >    
 >   >
 >    Peace,
 >     >
 >     >  --
 >     >  Doug
 >   Yanega
 >        
 >    Dept. of
 >   Entomology
 >     >
 >    
 >       Entomology Research
 Museum
 >     >
 >    Univ. of California,
 >   Riverside, CA
 >    
 >   
 >   92521-0314
 >     > 
    skype:
 >     dyanega
 >     >  phone:
 >   (951)
 >    827-4315
 >    
 >   (disclaimer: opinions are mine,
 >    not
 >     >
 >     UCR's)
 >     >       
         http://cache.ucr.edu/~heraty/yanega.html
 >     > 
    "There are some
 >     enterprises in which a 
 careful
 >    disorderliness  >   
        is the
 >   true  method" -  > 
 Herman Melville, Moby  Dick,
 >   Chap.
 >    82  >  >
 >   
 >   _______________________________________________
 >     >  Taxacom Mailing
 List
 >   
 >   
 >    >  Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 >     >  http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 >     >  The Taxacom Archive
 back to 1992
 >   may  be  searched at:
 >     > http://taxacom.markmail.org
 >     >
 >     >  Celebrating
 >   29
 >     years of Taxacom in 2016.
 >     
 >    
 >   
 >   _______________________________________________
 >     Taxacom Mailing List
 >     Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 >     http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 >     The Taxacom Archive back to
 1992 may be
 >   searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
 >     
 >     Celebrating 29 years
 >   of
 >     Taxacom in 2016.
 > _______________________________________________
 > Taxacom Mailing List
 > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
 >
 > Celebrating 29 years of Taxacom in 2016.
 
 -- 
 __________________________________________________
 
 Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D., F.R.E.S.
 
 US Post Office Address:
 Montana Entomology Collection
 Marsh Labs, Room 50
 1911 West Lincoln Street
 Montana State University
 Bozeman, MT 59717
 USA
 
 UPS, FedEx, DHL Address:
 Montana Entomology Collection
 Marsh Labs, Room 50
 1911 West Lincoln Street
 Montana State University
 Bozeman, MT 59718
 USA
 
 
 (406) 994-4610 (voice)
 (406) 994-6029 (FAX)
 mivie at montana.edu
 
 _______________________________________________
 Taxacom Mailing List
 Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
 
 Celebrating 29 years of Taxacom in 2016.



More information about the Taxacom mailing list