[seqfan] Re: Summer hours - give me a break

zak seidov zakseidov at yahoo.com
Wed Aug 18 08:53:45 CEST 2010


Dear Neil, 
SeqFans,

One (among other things) thing that 
I aint agree with  is 
these occasional "cries" about
"usual suspects", "violators", "vacations" etc.

Here we  "contrive" problems
that shouldn't be at all.

I mean (and wrote many times in this list):
make TWO files:
received.txt and accepted.txt (=recent.txt) and 
that's all!!

And even ONE more file: rejected.txt (this one for instructional, pedagogical purposes,
very important from my POV: 
"silent rejection" is not appropriate!)

No scientific/public edition has such a problem
and no scientific/public edition EVER says: 
plz don't send us your submissions...

With all due respect,
Zak 

PS Hope with wiki these problems
will disappear "silently" though.


--- On Tue, 8/17/10, N. J. A. Sloane <njas at research.att.com> wrote:

> From: N. J. A. Sloane <njas at research.att.com>
> Subject: [seqfan] Re: Summer hours - give me a break
> To: seqfan at seqfan.eu
> Cc: njas at research.att.com
> Date: Tuesday, August 17, 2010, 11:53 PM
> 
> Max A. asked:
> 
> > Neil, do you imply that the most of "violators" are
> subscribers of SeqFan?
> I (naively?) assumed that the reason of still high volume
> of
> submissions is that they come from the outside of the
> SeqFan circle.
> 
> Me: not sure of the answer. I suspect they ARE
> subscribers.
> 
> Of course it is people outside the circle (maybe they
> saw the Science News article) who often send in 
> the best new sequences, which is why I have not posted any
> 
> public notice about summer hours.
> 
> And please remember, everyone, interesting new sequences,
> especially with a real mathematical background, or from
> a publication or web site, are always welcome.
> 
> So are corrections of serious errors.
> 
> 
>  Best regards
>         
>      Neil
> 



      




More information about the SeqFan mailing list