Re: MCM - Digest V1 #144

[Neil Frank <nfrank@mindspring.com>]

DG:> I will ask him what caused the delay if someone will tell me
>which specific delay we are talking about.    

NF: this year the BB had a badproduction slip , with no issues at all until
July, then suddenly three BB's within the space of a few weeks.


EO: Still need to
>>verify whether they pay their authors (I thought they did).
>
DG: >Erik, I believe he told me BB does NOT pay authors.

NF: Herlong told me the same thing.

NF: He also told me that by not paying authors, he believes they have lost
some authors to the competitor magazine - Cichlid News.


Karen said
>  I think the idea is to give them a greater
>_incentive_ to submit material, to avoid the problem that Neil has had
>recently, with a lck of new articles to publish.

NF:This was not the reason for the recent delay in TAG. For 10 years I have
had the same submission rate - LOW! 

>
KR:
>It is my understanding is that these 4 pages are _strictly_ for AGA
>business and news.  Our members would _still_ be encouraged to write and
>submit articles as they always have.  The difference is that they will
>actually get paid for them.  We could also give them a years free
>membership, but I don't think it's necessary if they will be paid for their
>contribution.


NF:I don't know if Dave is planning to pay people to write short snippits
for inclusion in the AGA portion of PAM. [Dave: will you pay for a 1-2 page
article? or a picture, if AGA wants to showcase a member's tank?] If he
doesn't and it  is part of the mag that AGA controls, then AGA can
reward/encourage members in a different way- like give a subscription. I
wasn't suggesting it in addtion to payment from PAM.

>
KR: >With Dave's current "wish list" for articles, I think it might even
>encoursge people _more_ to not be intimidated about writing beginner
>articles and experiences.  Same with write-ups presenting some of the very
>nice display tanks that we know people have.

NF: Maybe because they would get paid if the article is accepted.
Otherwise,the same wish list has been presented every year or so in my
editorial column... with predicably poor results.


KR: 
>I have not seen Ichthyologica, so I can't even begin to comment.  I'm also
>not sure who you'll get to write this sort of stuff, and write it in a way
>that it doesn't read like a peer-reviewed scientific journal, but something
>of use to aquatic gardeners as opposed to aquatic botanists.  But I
>certainly wouldn't reject the idea out of hand.
>
>Just be aware, that for a while, TAG was getting the reputation of being
>over the heads of the majority of our members.

NF: I am not in favor of including Ichthyologica type stuff. [Some people
still think TAG is too technical, but I only hear from < 1 percent of the
members and most are complaints.] For real science, there are enough
journals out there (e.g.aquatic botany) where this material should go.  I
also note that for the peer review journal, the author sometimes pays the
publisher not the other way around.

--Neil

PS. To make these conversations easier to follow, please try to delete the
non-relevant portions of the incoming message and insert initials as I did
above to make it clear who said what.