[OPE-L:5037] Re: RE: Re: The RRPE Controversy

From: glevy@pratt.edu
Date: Thu Feb 22 2001 - 15:28:12 EST

Re Andrew's[OPE-L:5036]:

> Cool.  But perhaps also question-begging.  What would you consider
> to be proof, Jerry?  Under what conditions would you acknowledge
> that suppression has indeed occurred?

I think that's a fair question. I would consider proof in this context to be statements (written or verbal and witnessed) from the editors and/or referees that the reason why articles were rejected was because they represented a TSSI perspective. Even better, would be statements that the body in question has a *policy* of rejecting submissions from TSSI advocates. 

Anyway, that seems like a reasonable answer to your question. If someone else has a better answer, then I am open to suggestions.

What I think is *not* evidence is *just* statistics which show that x out of y  many articles/reviews from those advocating a TSSI have been rejected. I reject this as the basis for claiming supression because there could be other, legitimate reasons for rejecting submissions.

In solidarity, Jerry

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Thu Mar 01 2001 - 14:01:40 EST