Re: LENR-CANR editorial policy

2004-08-23 Thread Mitchell Swartz



At 10:45 AM 8/23/2004, Jed Rothwell admits to censoring, but then
purports it is for
political reasons, such as not to upset some of his
critics (ROTFLOL)
so he will not get hit with by a baseball bat (given) to
Robert Park.

Rothwell:
I will not hand a baseball bat to Robert Park and ask him to please
hit me over the head with it! It is a shame that CF is so political, but
it is, and we must pay attention to politics, image and public
relations.
The claim that we are censoring is
ridiculous.
 Given that Rothwell has brought this up again, 
it is important to correct his flawed arguments.
 The claim of censorship was correct. 
Also, Dr. Mallove was correct about the censorship. 
Also, those who posted me after this began, 
and those who discussed what happened to them 
at ICCF-10 have been also correct.
There HAS been censoring at (the misnamed) LENR-CANR web site.
It his their choice. However, removing cold fusion articles, 
or any article, for political reasons, -- or for any reason
whatsoever--
is by definition censoring. 
This is quite consistent when compared to the definition, after
Webster:
censor - to subject to censorship;
 an official who reads communications and deletes forbidden
material.
 Q.E.D.

 Hence, Dr. Mallove, Mr. Webster, and the other were
all correct, and
in fact it would not matters if the reason was the purest of
motives.
However, in this case, as stated previously, given that it is
admittedly
at least political,
Subject: Storms/Rothwell censorship 
This is known as science by politics -- it is disgusting.
Storms doesn't
have leg to stand on and he knows it. - - Gene 






Re: LENR-CANR editorial policy

2004-08-23 Thread Edmund Storms


What are you trying to accomplish, Mitchell? How is applying a pejorative
word to the reason your papers are not on the site going to get your papers
on the site? You might argue that some work is being censored
but your work is not being censored. We will never agree as to why
your previous attempts at sending copies did not work so your complaining
just makes you look ridiculous and wastes time. All you need to do is send
the papers you want in full text and be done with it.
Ed
Mitchell Swartz wrote:

At 10:45 AM 8/23/2004, Jed Rothwell admits to censoring, but then purports
it is for
"political reasons", such as not to upset some of his "critics" (ROTFLOL)
so he will not get hit with by "a baseball bat (given) to Robert
Park".


Rothwell: "I
will not hand a baseball bat to Robert Park and ask him to please hit me
over the head with it! It is a shame that CF is so political, but it is,
and we must pay attention to politics, image and public relations.
The claim that we are "censoring" is ridiculous."

 Given that Rothwell has brought this up again,
it is important to correct his flawed arguments.
 The claim of censorship was correct.
Also, Dr. Mallove was correct about the censorship.
Also, those who posted me after this began,
and those who discussed what happened to them
at ICCF-10 have been also correct.
There HAS been censoring at (the misnamed) LENR-CANR web site.
It his their choice. However, removing cold fusion articles,
or any article, for "political" reasons, -- or for any reason whatsoever--
is by definition censoring.
This is quite consistent when compared to the definition, after
Webster:
"censor - to subject to censorship;
 an official who reads communications and deletes forbidden
material."
 Q.E.D.

 Hence, Dr. Mallove, Mr. Webster, and the other were
all correct, and
in fact it would not matters if the reason was the purest of motives.
However, in this case, as stated previously, given that it is admittedly
at least "political",
Subject: Storms/Rothwell censorship
"This is known as science by politics -- it is disgusting.
Storms doesn't
have leg to stand on and he knows it." - - Gene