[Taxacom] Important note Re: two names online published - one new species
Stephen Thorpe
stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Sun Jan 24 18:18:16 CST 2016
BTW, Mike, you accuse me of a "personal attack" against you (for merely pointing out that you asked something that I had already answered!), and then you accuse me of having a (your words) "conspiracy fetish"! There is a word beginning with H which describes you (and possibly words starting with other letters too!) There is no conspiracy, just a common or garden case of COI, plain for all the world to see.
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: "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>, taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Received: Monday, 25 January, 2016, 1:06 PM
Stephen,
Again, you try to distract us with a personal attack,
claiming I am not
doing something "properly." Do try to stick to the
topic.
Zootaxa dates to before the amendment but was not compliant
with the
amendment before the Amendment was proposed, so your straw
man is just
smoke and mirrors to cover your conspiracy fetish.
Because Zootaxa was
compliant with the Amendment after the amendment was
adopted, but by the
time it was in force, sensibly taking advantage of the long
announced
period between being advertized and going into force, is
simply the
actions of a good editor trying to work within the needs of
Zoological
Nomenclature and our community.
Your argument is like saying cow udders were designed to
optimized the
profits of those who make milking machines.
Mike
On 1/24/2016 4:37 PM, Stephen Thorpe wrote:
> 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.
>
> .
>
--
__________________________________________________
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
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list