PAM

[Dave Gomberg <gomberg@wcf.com>]

>From: krandall@world.std.com
>X-Sender: krandall@world.std.com
>X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 
>Date: Thu, 16 Sep 1999 13:36:16 -0400
>To: Dave and Diana Gomberg <gomberg@wcf.com>, aga-mcm@aquatic-gardeners.org
>Subject: PAM
>X-Rcpt-To: gomberg@wcf.com
>
>>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?]

No.  AGA's pages are in a never-never land between editorial (for which we
pay, and which PAM exclusively controls) and ads (for which we charge and
which the advertiser mostly controls).

> 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: I'm not sure what type of short snippits you mean.  If they are AGA
>news, I would suspect not.  If it's showcasing a beautiful tank, I would
>think that would be in line with Dave's goals, and part of the "body" of
>the magazine.

If we end up with a "beautiful tank" section, sounds right to me.   In
fact, to the extent that aquascaping is our subject, such a section would
be right on topic.

>>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: That's what I meant.
>>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.  
>KR: I agree. 

But we are still waiting for a good revision of a bunch of genera.   Most
journals have page charges, not payments to the author.   If that is what
it takes to get the genus revised, let's do it.

Neil and Karen, would you say the correct amount of scientific stuff is
zero?  I don't think we should drag the level of PAM down to the most
illiterate whiner.   Would you advocate not discussing evolution because
Bob Dixon doesn't believe in it?   Tough cookies, I say.  Let him not read
the scientific pages.  I will even print a pitchfork by the page number so
he will know which ones to skip.
--
Dave Gomberg, San Francisco            mailto:gomberg@wcf.com
For low cost CO2 systems that work:  http://www.wcf.com/co2iron 
Tropica MasterGrow in the USA:      http://www.wcf.com/tropica 
-----------------------------------------------------------------