Newsgroup sci.geo.earthquakes 5177

Directory

OK, I think this is my cue.
I proposed a related idea about six months ago in the IMAGRS-L (Remote Sensing)
forum.   My suggestion was for an Web-based library, in which papers
would be fully indexed and cross-referenced.   Abstracts should always be
kept online, and full papers would be retrievable in an appropriate format
(eg PostScript, LaTex, word-processor) if available.
Since then I have developed software fully implementing this idea.
In addition, it supports conferencing, in the form of a threaded discussion
(like Usenet) originating from any document in the Library.   Other
features include collaborative authoring, configuration control,
and unique Holistic Hypertext - a mechanism for generating HTML links
which are guaranteed to be correct and up-to-date when you *read* a
document, without the author ever having to think about them!
Hence I believe it is possible to meet all these goals (subject in all cases
to permission from the relevant copyright holders):
(1) Full Refereed papers are entered in the Library, either in full or
    as index cards with abstracts.
(2) Papers pending publication or in preparation may be entered, possibly
    with restricted access, facilitating collaboration by authors working
    from different sites and refereeing.
(3) Any paper may generate public discussion, which is archived alongside
    the paper itself on the webserver.
(4) The whole collection is automatically indexed and cross-referenced,
    and is searchable.
(and yes, the software to do this is up and running NOW)!
This appears to be rather excessively crossposted, so I'll chop it a little
arbitrarily to those on which I post at least something (if only the
SATFAQ pointer).
Nick Kew.

This is something that I've been waiting for. 
BUT....
> 1) The peer-review process of scientific journals may take from many
> months to over a year.  
> 
> 2) The review process is often arbitrary in nature.
These two statements scare me a lot. As was noted in the PBS series "Life
on the Internet" (good series IMHO), information coming from the internet
still seems to have an importance and creditablity that is not given to
info coming from "traditional" methods. The series suggested that this may
be due to the newness of the medium.
This concern may not be as applicable to the scienitific community, but
the lack of peer review for all its faults is really the only assurance of
quality work. Even then I have my doubts on occasion :).
Richard Ottolini noted that...
> Almost every academic professional society has considered this issue
> and many started experiments in the area.
> One minor surprise is that some experiments (AIP) found it *more* expensive
> to publish a web journal at the same quality as a printed journal,
> probably because the screen QC tools aren't as good as for print,
> and publishers have to expand their personal to use the new technology.
> This may just be a transient phenomena.
I've a feeling that the costs will come down fairly rapidly. This
situation is probably akin to the cost of word processing and desktop
publishing. At first each was cumbersome and expensive. But as the
software got better the cost came down and the ease of use went up.
HTML publishing is getting easier every month. There are lots of new
software packages that can convert text and graphics directly from word
processing documents.
On my own wish list....
A service that works similiar to what is availible for newpapers. A
service that has articles from many journals scanned for a person's
keywords/topics and then sent via e-mail. Perhaps just sending the
abstract at first and then order the entire article if it is of interest.
Hopefully this could be done for a flat fee per year or on a per "article
requested" basis, depending on the user. Though free would be even better
:)
-- 
Toney Lowery
See and Say 'Hi' to Michael Anthony Lowery Born July 25, 1996 at...
http://www.intersurf.com/~tlowery/Michael.html
Soon to be graduating (MS Landscape Architecture)
alowery@tiger.lsu.edu
tlowery@intersurf.com
http://www.intersurf.com/~tlowery
"Easily Distracted by Shiny Objec... Hey! What's That!?!?"

This is an excellent idea for getting current work out in a rush but has
no checks.  The work could be totally unfounded or bogus.  That is why
there is a review commity for journal pubs. Also if a publisher wanted
to publish in a journal, the material published to the web is not
eligible because it is no longer original.  There is a disclaimer in
ACS's Analytical Chemistry that says anything previously published,
either in a journal, on the net or even on your homepage is not original
thus not publishable in the journal.

REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) 
         unmoderated group sci.geo.earthquakes (change in charter only)
         moderated group sci.geo.geology (moderates existing group)
         moderated group sci.geo.earthquakes.calif-world
         moderated group sci.geo.earthquakes.predictions
This is a formal Request For Discussion (RFD) for the reorganization
of some Geology groups in the sci.geo.* hierarchy.  This is not a
Call For Votes (CFV); you cannot vote at this time. Procedural
details are below.
Newsgroup lines:
sci.geo.earthquakes               Seismic events and predictions.
sci.geo.geology                   Geological Science.
sci.geo.earthquakes.calif-world   Seismic events worldwide.
sci.geo.earthquakes.predictions   Predictions of seismic events.
RATIONALE: sci.geo.earthquakes
The sci.geo.earthquakes group is unmoderated to provide for the
rapid propagation of earthquake news.
RATIONALE: sci.geo.geology
The sci.geo.geology group provides a general discussion area for
the diverse field of geology.
RATIONALE: sci.geo.earthquakes.calif-world
This discussion includes California and the world.  It is the place
to read and post nearly everything on the earthquakes topic with
world wide news coverage including California.
RATIONALE: sci.geo.earthquakes.predictions
A discussion area of quake prediction technology and actual
predictions of events foretold.
CHARTER: sci.geo.earthquakes
This group provides a duplicate of topics combining the charter
of both the calif-world and predictions group listed below.  The
group is unmoderated, providing a means for the rapid propagation
of earthquake news. 
END CHARTER
CHARTER: sci.geo.geology 
This group provides a forum to exchange ideas, opinions, views and 
information as it relates to all aspects of solid earth geology
and geophysics, "the science dealing with the structure of the
earth's crust and formation and development of its various layers,
it includes the study of individual rock types and early forms of
life found as fossils in rocks."
Appropriate topics include but are not limited to
  plate tectonics
  tectonophysics
  petrology
  mineralogy
  volcanology
  structural geology
  paleontology
  sedimentary processes
  basin analysis
  seismic exploration
  seismic stratigraphy
  petroleum geology
  seismology
  geochemistry
  glaciation
  groundwater hydrology
  geochronology
  paleomagnetism
  paleoclimatology
END CHARTER
CHARTER: sci.geo.earthquakes.calif-world
This group provides a forum to exchange ideas, opinions, views and
information as it relates to seismic activity.
Discussions regarding predictions of foretold seismic activity
should not be conducted here.  Instead, predicting and predictions
should be discussed in the sci.geo.earthquakes.predictions news group.
Topics excluded here are the methods or particular forecasts of
foretold events or statements about the probability of such occurrences
at specific times, places, or dates or intervals of such.
Topics which are not considered predictions and are not excluded
here are discussions of the likelihood of damage in any event so long
as no specific time frame is associated with the event within the
discussion or if the time frame is only used as an estimate to
illustrate the need to discuss the damage potential such that the
purpose or intention of the discussion is not centered about a
prediction or calling attention to a prediction.
Appropriate topics include but aren't necessarily limited to:
   seismicity and seismological techniques
   measurement of earthquakes
   recent and significant historical earthquakes
   causes of earthquakes
   sources of earthquake data
   secondary phenomena associated with earthquakes
   geological techniques employed in earthquake hazard identification
   zonation for classifying earthquake hazard potential
   earthquake safety
   techniques for mitigating earthquake hazards
   seismic parameters for structural design
END CHARTER.
CHARTER: sci.geo.earthquakes.predictions
This group provides a forum to exchange ideas, opinions, views and
information as it relates to the prediction of seismic activity.
All predictions discussed shall be predictions of seismic events.
Predictions of other events should not be included except if
directly related to a seismic event.
Appropriate topics include but aren't necessarily limited to:
   causes of earthquakes as related to predicting them
   sources of precursory data
   interpretation of precursory data
   earthquake prediction technology
   actual predictions of events foretold
   windows of increased probability of seismic events
   evaluation of the performance of predictions
END CHARTER
CHARTER: all three moderated groups
         excluding sci.geo.earthquakes which is unmoderated
Moderation policies: 
1. The goal of moderation is to keep the discussion focused on the
   group's charter, thus maintaining the quality of posts.
2. The moderation mechanism will be a robot which auto-approves
   posts.  The person responsible for maintaining the approval
   criterion is called the moderator.  The moderator shall issue
   surveys and solicit votes from the group, and that vote shall
   constitute the entire and only deciding factor by which the
   post acceptance criterion is established.  The voting procedure
   and details shall be maintained by the moderator and is not
   part of the charter herein, thereby permitting the group to vote
   to the moderator and refine these procedures and details without
   the need to reorganize the group.
3. Each of the three separate moderated newsgroups will vote for
   its own post acceptance criterion, apart from that of the other
   groups.
4. The same moderator may maintain the approval criterion for
   all groups or a different moderator may be moderate each group
   individually.  
5. Although no legal relationships are created by this document,
   the moderator is expected to act as if he or she were in a
   fiduciary relationship of trust and loyalty to the participants
   of the newsgroup.
6. The present moderator selects their own replacement, or
   may delegate moderation of one or all groups to another
   person or persons. 
8 A moderator serves until he or she resigns. A moderator
   may resign at any time. A moderator is requested to give
   the group adequate notice in order to insure an orderly
   transition.
9. A moderator may designate a back-up moderator for vacation
   or emergency or other periods, and is requested to give the
   group adequate notice.  The back-up moderator shall only
   function to collect and tally votes and maintain the BL,
   substituting for and having the same power as the moderator.
MODERATOR INFO: all three moderated groups
Moderator: Richard Adams 
Moderator qualifications: 
I have been in a fiduciary capacity for fifteen years.  I am
gainfully employed and my employment is not with the government
or a government subcontractor.  My occupation and experience
is scientific and management oriented, it is not related to geology.
Therefore, I have no bias regarding the geology fields