Bernard Lang writes: > >right ... > > why not erase all historical mistakes from the history books ... so >that we can learn only how thing should go, and not how they can go >wrong.
I was not speaking of books nor peer reviewed 'published' papers, but rather 'preprints' aka working papers. That is a different issue. Bob > >Bernard > > >On Wed, Dec 04, 2002 at 02:57:02PM -0500, David Goodman wrote: >> If they disappear others may well make the same mistake. But if they >> continue to exist, with the error noted, people will learn from >> them (embarrassing as it may prove to be for the authors of the example). >> >> Bob Parks wrote: >> >> > ... There are some papers which prove to be wrong, even >> > though there was considerable thought put into them - and possibly >> > they should, as much as possible, disappear. >> ... >> > >> > >bp> Maybe not for other professions, but certainly in economics, business, >> > >bp> and political science (subjects about which I have knowledge). >> > > >> > >I am sure this was the practise and expectation in paper days, when >> > >drafts were sent only to specific trusted colleagues, but it is a fact >> > >that public posting on the Web is (like publication) another ball-game >> > >(a bit more like guassian roulette). >> > >> > YES, again I agree. >> > >> > >bp> The persistent URL should, as with arXiv, point to the most recent >> > >bp> draft and penultimate drafts should be in the trash. >> > > >> > >That is an option that should be available, but its use should be >> > >strongly discouraged. Better to selectively email the potentially >> > >embarrassing drafts, intended to be forgotten, and self-archive only the >> > >ones one feels one can live with being seen publicly (and potentially >> > >remembered and referred to forever). It is, after all, something of an >> > >antidote to unwelcome citing and quoting to be able to point to the >> > >extant draft and say: "See, it said 'temporary draft, to be revised, do >> > >not cite or quote'...." >> > >> > As above, we might have a bit of disagreement about how strongly >> > one discourages removal, but I think we are in agreement. >> > >> > And again, it is not the "potentially embarrassing drafts, >> > intended to be forgotten," but rather any 'draft'. I would certainly >> > not want to revert to the mailing of drafts - but maybe I make a >> > whole lot more mistakes than you do and that is the reason that we >> > slightly disagree. >> > >> > >(Ceterum censeo: This is all irrelevant to the issue of open access, >> > >which is mainly about open access to the research literature after peer >> > >review. How early a draft one wishes to make openly accessible before >> > >peer review is a matter for the author to decide. But open access should >> > >in general be thought of as being forever.) >> > >> > Ah, mea culpa. My open access (moa?) concerns both pre peer review >> > and post peer review. In economics, where lags between submission and >> > acceptance are large, require an open access working paper culture. >> > >> > I fully agree that the post peer review literature ought to be >> > persistant. If corrections are needed, then errata should be posted >> > (and linked). >> > >> > Gee, now that we nearly completely agree, one of us isn't needed. >> > I hope its me. >> > >> > (;-) >> > >> > Bob >> > >> > *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* >> > # Economics Working Paper Archive # >> > # http://econwpa.wustl.edu/wpawelcome.html # >> > # gopher econwpa.wustl.edu # >> > # # >> > # Send a mail message (empty body) # >> > # To: econ...@econwpa.wustl.edu # >> > # Subject: get announce # >> > *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* >> > Always remember: inertia has no effect on the ultimate steady state >> > solution. >> > NEVER remember: Keynes said in the long run we are all dead. >> > *--------------------------------------------------------------------------* >> > | Bob Parks Voice: (314) 935-5665 >> > | >> > | Department of Economics, Campus Box 1208 Fax: (314) 935-4156 >> > | >> > | Washington University >> > | >> > | One Brookings Drive >> > | >> > | St. Louis, Missouri 63130-4899 >> > bpa...@wuecona.wustl.edu| >> > *--------------------------------------------------------------------------* >> > >> >> Dr. David Goodman >> Biological Sciences Bibliographer >> Princeton University Library >> dgood...@princeton.edu > >-- > Non aux Brevets Logiciels - No to Software Patents > SIGNEZ http://petition.eurolinux.org/ SIGN > >bernard.l...@inria.fr ,_ /\o \o/ Tel +33 1 3963 5644 >http://pauillac.inria.fr/~lang/ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Fax +33 1 3963 5469 > INRIA / B.P. 105 / 78153 Le Chesnay CEDEX / France > Je n'exprime que mon opinion - I express only my opinion > CAGED BEHIND WINDOWS or FREE WITH LINUX > -- *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* # Economics Working Paper Archive # # http://econwpa.wustl.edu/wpawelcome.html # # gopher econwpa.wustl.edu # # # # Send a mail message (empty body) # # To: econ...@econwpa.wustl.edu # # Subject: get announce # *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Always remember: inertia has no effect on the ultimate steady state solution. NEVER remember: Keynes said in the long run we are all dead. *--------------------------------------------------------------------------* | Bob Parks Voice: (314) 935-5665 | | Department of Economics, Campus Box 1208 Fax: (314) 935-4156 | | Washington University | | One Brookings Drive | | St. Louis, Missouri 63130-4899 bpa...@wuecona.wustl.edu| *--------------------------------------------------------------------------*