[sdpd] Re: New poll for sdpd

["Armel Le Bail" <alb...@cristal.org>]

Jeremy wrote :
>Finally, while I think this is a useful topic of discussion,
>please don't overdo the "agent provocateur" bit Armel - I know
>it can be useful to start discussion in the first place, but
>it should be done in moderation ;-)

Moderation is something hard to define. I think that a
scientific paper presenting new results/methods is by
definition unmoderated. Try to submit a moderated paper
to the prestigious Nature or Science and tell me about it.

Did I say that the vote was anonymous ? It is. Even
the "moderators" (L. Cranswick and me ;-) cannot have access
to the names of voting subscribers.

The meaningless (or meaningful ?-) current vote results
are below :

    Responses:
    Choices  
                    Votes  
                                %  
                 3 replies 
  Always             0        0.00% 
  Yes if Bayesian    0        0.00% 
  Never              3      100.00%

  Abstentions : 269

The vote is open still for one month at :
         http://www.egroups.com/polls/sdpd

You may even change your mind with this e-bulletin
system.

Best,

Armel Le Bail
http://www.cristal.org/



-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/14/_/40740/_/972998940/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->