Re: Fw: Elementary Crypt Culture; PAM article (fwd)

[Neil Frank <nfrank@mindspring.com>]

At 01:37 PM 03/13/2001 -0800, Erik Olson wrote:
>"Incidentally, the article in PAM is exactly the one I was going to
>publish in the next issue of TAG.  I suppose I can't very well publish it
>now, right?  I'm pissed."
>
>Hmm, within the context of the larger message, this hardly seems like
>asking for feedback. If such a message were directed to me, I would
>interpret it as "feedback optional".

Erik, thanks for your support. When Mary said that I "hung her out to dry",
I could not remember her specifically asking for my advice. Frankly, I did
not even remember her sending me the above note on Mar 2. Perhaps, I would
have remembered it she was more direct.... or if she did not start the
email with an  ungrateful tone regarding my telling her about the Ted Held
article, to which she replied:

>> Thanks for the suggestion, but Karen already called my attention to the
>> article and forwarded it to me. 

A simple "thank you" would have been sufficient.

Here is the full text of my response to Mary this morning, which includes
the March 7 note I sent to her at the request of the SC. I have not yet
decided how and even if I am going to respond to the remainder of her note.
Life is too short to be bothered with stuff like this. The truth be known,
my recommendation to her was clearly influenced by the SC discussion, but I
chose not to word it that way so it would not appear that the SC was
dictating how she should run TAG. I tried to make it seem like the
recommendation was from me, with SC support. 

>At 11:28 PM 03/12/2001 -0500, MARY wrote:
>>The rest of the Standing Committee needs to know that I first communicated
>>with you about Ole and Claus' article on March 1st and specifically asked
>>for your feedback on March 2nd.
>
>Mary,
>In response to the point above, I thought I responded to your request for
information on March 1 as follows:
>
>>>Also, have you seen Gomberg's comment in the above mention APD about
PAM?  I was going to print an article submitted to us by Ole Petersen in
the next issue of TAG.  It sounds suspiciously like an article Gomberg says
he is publishing.  Do you know anything about this?
>>
>>Petersen article that will be in the next issue of PAM is called
>>"Interactions between CO2 and light stimulate the growth of aquatic plants"
>>
>>the authors are
>>Ole Pedersen, University of Copenhagen, opedersen@zi.ku.dk
>>Claus Christensen, Tropica Aquarium Plants, clc@tropica.dk
>>Troels Andersen, University of Copenhagen, tandersen@zi.ku.dk
>
>I told you EVERYTHING that I knew at that time. I still do not have ANY
knowedge about how Gomberg received the article from Clause. My role was
PAM reviewer. THAT's IT.
>
>I dont have a record of a followup question from you (between Mar 1 and
march 7) and did not hear more about it until I heard from Karen, thru the
SC that you had some issues. 
>
>I will respond to your other whining later.
>Neil
>
>
>
>
>  You choose not to respond in a timely way.
>>Karen tells me that you didn't even tell the SC that I had raised the issue
>>with you.
>>
>>I want you to know that in this situation I feel you have hung me out to
>>dry.  The whole situation was totally unnecessary.  Had you responded in a
>>timely way, I would have been spared the embarrassment.  I am tired of your
>>lack of  support.  Considering you took your time in getting back to me, you
>>have no right to second guess my decision.
>>
>>Here are my responses to specific points of your letter.
>>
>>
>>> Mary,
>>> I think it is unfortunate that AGA did not get an "exclusive" on
>>Petersen's article  "Interactions between CO2 and light stimulate the growth
>>of aquatic plants,
>>> but I think it is STILL VERY APPROPRIATE for you to publish it in TAG.
>>
>>I don't think you understand my position.  I was
>>not upset that PAM published a story about Claus' and Ole's findings, but I
>>did object  that they sent both Dave and me the EXACT SAME article, and
>>neither one of us had an inkling of what was going on.
>>
>>>I have discussed this with Karen and others, and we all agree. PAM's
>>readership is small and there are many AGA members which do not get PAM.
>>
>>I wish you had not waited so long to give me your feedback.  Had I known how
>>you  felt, I probably would have responded differently.  When I asked for
>>your feedback, and it was so late in coming, I figured I wasn't going to get
>>any, so I had better make a decision since I had kept Claus and Ole waiting
>>long enough.
>>
>>Also, you say that Paul has made some edits which should even make it
>>better. If I were you, I would print it without any mention that it  already
>>published in PAM. Make it seem that you were unaware that it was going  to
>>be publshed elsewhere (actually the truth).
>>
>>If you look at other magazines you will see similar duplication. For
>>example, Karen published an article about red plants in PAM and then a very
>>similar article appeared in AFM.
>>
>>I realize that there were two similar red plant articles and that there
>>tends  to be some duplication in aquarium magazines.  As a matter of fact, a
>>lot of what Peter Bradley writes, he recycles from Practical Fishkeeping.
>>But he gives me different articles in a different format, not the exact same
>>article  which   appears in PF.  I recognize that there are only so many
>>things   you  can talk about, so there is bound to be some repetition.
>>
>>I also recognize that since English is not Claus' and Ole's native tongue, I
>>can 't have the same expectations of them which is one of the reasons why I
>>have reconsidered my decision.
>>
>>From now on, whenever there is a big decision to be made, I am going to take
>>my concerns directly to the SC so as to avoid any future problems.
>>
>>Mary
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
  ------------------
  To unsubscribe from this list, e-mail majordomo@thekrib.com
  with "unsubscribe aga-sc" in the body of the message.
  Old messages are available at http://lists.thekrib.com/aga-sc
  When asked, log in as username is "aga-sc", and password "showy".