DJ Cravens <[email protected]> wrote:
"I did publish it! I just now gave the wrong link, but as I noted before I
published it here: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/RothwellJthefuturem.pdf yes,
having the correct link helps.... a little.
You owe it yourself to read the paper I already provided." I admit I just
skimmed it, but it seems only to address WHO is accessing the materials, not
which papers/data/presentations are being accessed. I do not see your point.
How does it tell me that this or that kind of papers or presentations are
better at "acceptance" by your readers? Even with knowing which papers are
accessed, I am not sure it would tell me more that which is referenced by other
papers or internally by your site. Can you share what "popular" papers are
being accessed? Is there a list somewhere? I missed it. What are their
characteristics? Do they have the videos, and such that you keep claiming are
required for acceptance? If it turns out that it is just specific org's then it
may mean that there is no use for individuals, like me or Mitch, to try to
play that game. It would support my case that, for me, I should try something
different that papers, presentations and demos at ICCF meetings.
- Jed
