[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