new keyword: probation

[zak seidov]

1. sorry for typo:

>all authors can judge for theseve how to improve
>their next submissions.

'd be:
all authors can judge for themselves how to improve
their next submissions.

2. as to (so many) complaints about (so many)
uninteresting sequences:
there are no uninteresting sequences,
there are uninterested people,
otherwise what is celebrated at 100K party -
succes or failure?

All the best, Zak



--- zak seidov <zakseidov at yahoo.com> wrote:

> Alex, Neil, Seqfans!
> 
> I don't like this "probation" at all:
> 
> my "idea" was to put ALL submissions
> first to separate file 
> ("rejected" is a rough name,
> "summitted.txt" is OK).
> 
> While editors gradually decide which ones may be
> included in the main database 
> (or moved back from main file to "summitted.txt" -
> which is more important IMHO), 
> all authors can judge for theseve how to improve
> their
> next submissions.
> 
> It is not a question that anyone should agree with
> editors' decision(s), simply all editors job
> should be open to public - that is my basic
> idea/desire.
> 
> Zak
> 
> PS1 Even "Natute" and "Science", maybe 
> the most snobbish J's (in physics)
> can not assure anyone that accepted (by them) papers
> are generally better than rejected (by them) ones.
> The
> more so about really genius papers.
> 
> PS2 I wonder can the editors and the most active
> users
> (not authors!) select say 1000 (less than 1% of all
> SEQ's) their favorite/important entries in OEIS.
> It'd be very much instructive to peruse such lists.
> 
> PS2 Another kind request to editors and to the most
> active users (and authors!): it'd be great to read
> say
> once a month some (semi-popular) reviews of topics
> on
> the base of OEIS. I guess that Neil do it at
> conferences and in papers/books, but are they
> publicly
> available on net. Also, I prefer to read reviews of
> others ('coz Neil may be highly non-objective to his
> dear child).
> 
> --- Alexandre Wajnberg
> <alexandre.wajnberg at skynet.be>
> wrote:
> 
> > 
> > 
> > > 
> > > I'm going to try the following: sequences of
> > doubtful value
> > > will get a new keyword:  probation.  I hope that
> > the associate editors
> > > and other seqfans will look at these from time
> to
> > time,
> > > and either edit them or suggest that they be
> > removed.
> > > 
> > > After a while, if noone votes for keeping them,
> > they will be removed.
> > 
> > And what if sequences haven't received votes for
> > keeping them, but haven't
> > been looked at? "after a while".
> > 
> > [I suppose "after a while" is only a part of the
> > (in)validation process, so
> > that sequences not yet looked at will appear as
> > such: still waiting for a
> > look before to be possibly rejected]
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam
> protection around 
> http://mail.yahoo.com 
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com