[seqfan] Re: On editors-authors discussions

[Richard Mathar]

mlb> From seqfan-bounces at list.seqfan.eu Fri Sep  9 03:14:24 2011
mlb> Return-Path: <seqfan-bounces at list.seqfan.eu>
mlb> X-Original-To: mathar at strw.leidenuniv.nl
mlb> Delivered-To: mathar at strw.leidenuniv.nl
mlb> Date: Thu, 08 Sep 2011 18:14:10 -0700
mlb> From: Marc LeBrun <mlb at well.com>
mlb> To: Sequence Fanatics Discussion list <seqfan at list.seqfan.eu>
mlb> Message-ID: <CA8EB672.7B7A%mlb at well.com>
mlb> Thread-Topic: [seqfan] Re: On editors-authors discussions
mlb> Thread-Index: AcxujcdMfu6AZsCdZUuG8VmYQAyWCg==
mlb> Subject: [seqfan] Re: On editors-authors discussions
mlb> X-BeenThere: seqfan at list.seqfan.eu
mlb> 
mlb> A possible way to phrase it might be as a concrete request, rather then an
mlb> open-ended question.  For example, instead of asking just
mlb> 
mlb>   "Why is this interesting?"
mlb> 
mlb> Make a concrete request
mlb> 
mlb>   "Could you please clarify with some brief notes what about this sequence
mlb> interested you, how you came to study it, or the like?"

In fact, this question is asked over and over again in "pink boxes" to the
same (small) group of submitters; so after having done this roughly 200+ times,
you start to be more to the point and save your time for more valuable tasks.

My vocabulary has run out of variations on this question long ago; native
speakers have a slight advantage, but are also getting exhausted at some
point.

Richard Mathar