Following multiple private and public comments by list members, I'm going to ask members to refrain from future discussion of this matter, on the list.
Thanks in advance for your cooperation. Andrew On Sun, 17 May 2020, 05:39 Jessica Gurevitch, < jessica.gurevi...@stonybrook.edu> wrote: > Tamas, that sounds terrible. I don't see how open publishing of the > reviewer's comments and name would solve the problem of editorial > misconduct, though. I was thinking of journals published by scientific > societies when I suggested societies. I don't know how editorial misconduct > could be adjudicated when the journal has decided that there was no > misconduct; that is really difficult, and there is an inherent COI here, it > seems like. If it is a subject editor, it would ordinarily go up to the > Editor in Chief, but there would be no recourse to a decision on the part > of the EiC that I can imagine. In the case that was being discussed in this > email thread, it seems to be an issue of authorship, so, perhaps the > journal might handle it more dispassionately than had it involved an > editor. Perhaps there does need to be some other place these issues can be > taken to, but I don't know what it would be, and I don't think competing > blogs or email is the answer. Who could serve as something like a "higher > court" in matters that seem to be unresolved at the level of the journal, > and who would have that authority? Professional societies could serve in > that role and censure people, but the issue of COIs and bias might still be > a problem. Then again, the U.S. Supreme Court, like those of other > countries, has issues with bias and COIs (and politics)! > > > > <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> > Virus-free. > www.avast.com > <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link> > <#m_-3516446473372640626_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> > > On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 10:00 PM Tamas Bodai <bodai...@googlemail.com> > wrote: > >> Jessica, Angel, >> >> I much appreciate raising those points. Perhaps, indeed, different types >> of misconduct might take different approaches to best deal with. I would >> like to make a few points though. >> >> It is scientists who make academic misconduct, and, so, we cannot take if >> for granted that scientists on a panel of investigation will conduct >> themselves ideally. >> >> When I suspected reviewer/editor misconduct in my case, I had no idea >> where to turn to for an independent investigation. I’m not sure what >> "Professional Society” would that be. The journal stated that they did not >> find misconduct as part of a formal investigation, and that was the end of >> it. I contacted the publisher afterwards, but after some time, I did not >> receive replies even to specific questions that I thought was reasonable to >> ask. The publisher was not willing to request an independent investigation >> by an ombudsman. >> >> In my case reviewer anonymity was an obstacle to have evidence, if there >> was any. This is perhaps a special case of misconduct (yet, may be the most >> common one), but certainly a very difficult one to tackle, potentially, by >> the author. My experience convinced me that reviewing should be allowed >> non-anonymously only. This is a preventative measure regarding misconduct, >> but might also do good to reviewing standards. >> >> Tamas >> >> >> On 17 May 2020, at 10:38 AM, angel kosfiszer <kosfisz...@sbcglobal.net> >> wrote: >> >> I agree with Jessica's approach. My niece had her paper, that was >> published in Europe, almost entirely copied by another person and published >> on a non European publisher. When she sent a letter the publisher he >> immediately responded and apologized, and hopefully took care, of the >> situation. >> , >> On Saturday, May 16, 2020, 8:25:39 PM CDT, Jessica Gurevitch < >> jessica.gurevi...@stonybrook.edu> wrote: >> >> >> If this is a serious charge, and it certainly sounds like it is, a formal >> complaint should be made to the journal or professional society. The >> journal and/or professional societies should (and I am sure will) respond; >> they have formal and much-discussed and evaluated mechanisms for this. >> Dueling blogs and emails are poor mechanisms and rely on hearsay >> and...well, stuff like that. I have been peripherally involved in such >> issues through professional societies, and I think that such matters are >> generally handled thoughtfully and carefully and fairly, from what I can >> tell. Since we are scientists, we should value the role of evidence; what >> constitutes the best evidence in an accusation of scientific misconduct is >> somewhat different than scientific evidence, but that's what is needed. The >> body evaluating it can exonerate the accused, or at the other extreme, >> withdraw a publication, or something in between. So, I'm all in favor of >> formal charges being brought to the journal or other venue if there is a >> serious accusation like this, but back and forth on email just doesn't wash >> for me. Evidence would be emails (dated), code, manuscripts, records of >> discussions, etc. It does point out that formal agreements on authorship >> should be discussed and reached at the start of any collaboration; my own >> experience is that expectations in the US, Europe, etc. for authorship >> differ considerably from common practice in China, with some unpleasant >> ramifications. >> >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> Jessica Gurevitch >> Distinguished Professor >> Department of Ecology and Evolution >> Stony Brook University >> Stony Brook, NY 11794-5245 USA >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ >> >> >> >> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> >> Virus-free. >> www.avast.com >> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link> >> >> On Sat, May 16, 2020 at 7:24 PM 'Tamas Bodai' via geoengineering < >> geoengineering@googlegroups.com> wrote: >> >> Such messages make us uncomfortable to read, but it might be the only way >> to deal with misconduct. Indeed, it is most common that people turn to the >> media when they experience injustice, rather than to the court. Many types >> of academic misconduct are probably not even covered by law or >> international law. Institutions and journals can conduct investigations at >> their own discretion, without any independent legal oversight. Given that >> their reputation is or could be also at stake to a certain extent, we >> cannot always trust that they would conduct a fair and thorough >> investigation; coverup is a possibility. >> >> In this particular case now, the allegation and defence has not provided >> evidence so far based on which members of the addressed research community >> can make up their mind. Perhaps it’s really not a good idea to squat this >> email list with a procedure mimicking a court case. Nevertheless, a good >> structure of a dispute, including submitting evidence, would be certainly >> required if it was meant to be anything constructive. An idea could be that >> the two parties set up their own blogs, and set out their case there. >> Certainly there would be interactions between these blogs in the form of >> claims and responses or counter-claims. These blogs can then be promoted >> with a very brief covering letter what they are about, and anyone >> interested, can go and check out the details. >> >> I’m not aware that such blogs exists, which is to say that it’s a fresh >> idea, and might be a not so good idea for some reason that i fail to >> consider just now. What i certainly see is that the BBC won’t write >> articles about such a dispute. >> >> On 17 May 2020, at 12:46 AM, Douglas MacMartin <dgm...@cornell.edu> >> wrote: >> >> I don’t believe that this is an appropriate forum for this. If there’s a >> concern, it should be brought up at BNU and with the journal, not aired >> publicly. (I could certainly state my opinion, but I don’t think that >> belongs here either.) >> >> >> >> *From:* geoengineering@googlegroups.com <geoengineering@googlegroups.com> >> *On Behalf Of *Andrew Lockley >> *Sent:* Saturday, May 16, 2020 8:14 AM >> *To:* geoengineering <geoengineering@googlegroups.com> >> *Subject:* Re: [geo] John Moore steal my research work: Conference >> poster proof >> >> The list does not permit ad hom. However, this is an alleged malpractice >> - so, on this specific occasion, I'm going to allow it (without endorsing >> it). >> >> I will refrain from passing judgement. I'd welcome discussion. >> >> >> Andrew >> On Sat, 16 May 2020, 13:10 Calaggier, <zhihuazhan...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Dear All >> >> John Moore's response is full of lies, moreover, many parts are not >> related to this article on permafrost. >> >> I am the master advisor of Yating Chen from 2016.9 to 2019.3. Since I >> left Beijing Normal University, GCESS college assigned Yating Chen a new >> advisor Dr Fengming Hui in the remaining three months (2019.3-2019.6). >> >> Below I show one proof to show that John Moore steal my research work: >> >> our poster title in Swiss Conference Program, see the last page >> The picture on our poster at the Swiss Conference, The lady in that pic >> is my master student Yating Chen >> >> >> >> >> Sincerely >> Zhihua Zhang >> >> Taishan Distinguished Professor >> Shandong University, China >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "geoengineering" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email togeoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/tencent_5F63925D2E802A955149220B40E3864EDC06%40qq.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/tencent_5F63925D2E802A955149220B40E3864EDC06%40qq.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "geoengineering" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAJ3C-07varKn-_Uva0e4j%3DkHfY%2BSs-ESDLhzPH92ZM80ENd-5A%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAJ3C-07varKn-_Uva0e4j%3DkHfY%2BSs-ESDLhzPH92ZM80ENd-5A%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "geoengineering" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CH2PR04MB6936E9C0B43713F3AEB9DF1B8FBA0%40CH2PR04MB6936.namprd04.prod.outlook.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CH2PR04MB6936E9C0B43713F3AEB9DF1B8FBA0%40CH2PR04MB6936.namprd04.prod.outlook.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "geoengineering" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/C3AD30AD-F294-4787-BB4E-996173698800%40googlemail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/C3AD30AD-F294-4787-BB4E-996173698800%40googlemail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> >> >> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon> >> Virus-free. >> www.avast.com >> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link> >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "geoengineering" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CA%2BPtSAO%2BTBXhR7bSTiZhoh9veq%3Do%3D8driudQWnWxeEHOxp3tvw%40mail.gmail.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CA%2BPtSAO%2BTBXhR7bSTiZhoh9veq%3Do%3D8driudQWnWxeEHOxp3tvw%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> >> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "geoengineering" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to geoengineering+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAJ3C-05ZSCAgLA%2B2PcXqjJRm%2BF9gySBrQVTHiurVQpMJbB05uA%40mail.gmail.com.
