Harry Veeder wrote:
Just a suggestion.
It might be helpful to develop a system of qualifying flags. e.g. One flag would denote the web site manager's knowledge of a paper's state of completion.
Normally, this is not a problem. Normally, I only record papers when I am sure they have been published. That is why there are only eight papers presently listed for ICCF-11. I will add the others to the database when Biberian sends them to me (or when he informs me he has them). In the case of ICCF-10, I was in charge of collecting and filing the papers, and I had to prepare the abstract book and conference schedule. I used the EndNote database for these jobs. I entered every author and title as the abstracts came in, before the conference. After the conference I left them all on file for a while. Months after the submission deadline passed, I figured they would be no more papers coming in, so I went into the database and deleted all titles that were never received, including Swartz's.
If I had not been in charge of ICCF10, I would never have heard a word about Swartz's phantom papers in the first place, and this brouhaha would not have erupted.
As far as I know, there is only one other unpublished paper in the database. If anyone finds others, please let me know. The only one is Amoco's and it is on file because other papers refer to it. (The whole point of EndNote is to make references easier.)
I erased the titles from several other no-show authors, but only Swartz went apeshit about it. Of course he is not really upset, because he did not bother to upload this paper into his own web page! (Or if he did, he is keeping the URL secret from me, and he will not give me permission to copy and upload it.) As you have seen here, I have a copy of his ICCF-9 paper, but he refuses to give me permission to upload it. In other words, he is censoring himself. He is the only person who is preventing his own papers from reaching LENR-CANR, and he is only doing this to make a stink and fool people into thinking that Storms and I censor the site. It is gutter politics, and childish nonsense.
Of course it is Swartz's choice to publish or not, and I could not care less about it. But he is certainly is weird. And childish, and annoying. Swartz and Steve Jones are both famous for playing these inept political games. Frankly, they both make me sick.
- Jed
