Re: sci.math.moderated?
From: Ross A. Finlayson (raf_at_tiki-lounge.com)
Date: 11/03/04
- Next message: Robert Vienneau: "Re: Chances of (random(0,n) + random(0,n) <= m)"
- Previous message: Bill Dubuque: "Re: Zero divisors question"
- Maybe in reply to: Ken Pledger: "Re: sci.math.moderated?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 3 Nov 2004 14:22:34 -0800
RexButler@hotmail.com (Rex Butler) wrote in message news:<53f5a534.0410281713.111a7f1a@posting.google.com>...
> What is stopping the creation of sci.math.moderated? The lack of moderators?
>
> Rex Butler
Blip! Bricka-flacka! Various other nonsense. That's about the
election. I watch some World War II documentaries from the library.
Look out for yourself, to hell with number one, they're not looking
out for you. Look out for others, but basically the prisoner's
dilemna is that the other guy is a crook. When I registered to vote
when I turned eighteen it was as a republican, because of fiscal
considerations and small government, and to vote against hardliners or
right-wing fascists in the primaries. Psychologically, examining
one's own and others' motives is not always easy, in terms of
uncertainty and ochlology. Washington as a whole leads to all the
insults ever made about Congress. 2004: crooks elected to the White
House.
Support the civilized platform.
Anyways, I posted to sci.math.moderated, several times, back in 1999
or so, it appeared in the newsreader, using SLRN, and four or five
others, some from some distant lands, replied. Those are the only
posts I've ever seen to sci.math.moderated. I was told about
sci.math.moderated by a fellow sci.math poster in private e-mail, he
mentioned that he had posted to it several times and no moderation was
forthcoming, and it is a different group than sci.math.research, and
that it was a coup to post to sci.math.moderated. The basic content
was the "Identity Expression Statement", I posted that 0, 1, and oo
(infinity) are the identity expression constants, and that lim 1/oo =
0. That was agreed by the respondents.
I think sci.math.moderated is basically defunct, but it could appear
at any time.
If you want a moderated mathematics newsgroup to establish credence of
your math writings among others, you might consider FOM, an e-mail
list with publically and theoretically anonymously accessible
archives, many of its contributors are published already in old-line
journals, but if you want to have others easily able to refer to your
work, there are many, many journals that are obscure and read by few,
and some that are widely read. You'd have better dissemination
getting onto ArXiv, among the thousands of cutting-edge, online
primary results in modern mathematics and physics. Each sci.math post
gets thousands of interested readers.
In terms of some new hierarchy of additional sci.math branchlets, I
don't know much about the "No-See-Em" groups, control, what-have-you,
but there aren't many off-topic posts to sci.math, it might seem to
the casual observer unmoderated but you'll notice that 95% of the
posts are not forged-sender drug advertisements, and as well there are
many posts that are spindled and mutilated to some extent, and I'd
like to stop that practice.
As noted in other posts on this thread, "sci.math.moderated", sci.math
is the premier open forum for mathematics discussion on the Internet,
the global network that has brought forth the first models of the open
global community, there are many more specific newsgroups with more
targetted discussions for specialists.
Warm regards,
Ross F.
- Next message: Robert Vienneau: "Re: Chances of (random(0,n) + random(0,n) <= m)"
- Previous message: Bill Dubuque: "Re: Zero divisors question"
- Maybe in reply to: Ken Pledger: "Re: sci.math.moderated?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
