[Cz-editcouncil] Resignation

[David Goodman]

A dispute on the appropriate level of he content is really not an
issue for the specialists, but either the general editor , or if his
objectivity is challenged,  generalist consultants; and if its a
challenge to the accuracy, then the way is an outside specialist or
two.  It's quite usual for an editor in chief to feel free is
disregard the referees--but then he had better be right most of the
time, or the publication goes downhill. .

On Tue, Nov 4, 2008 at 2:24 PM, M. BALDWIN-EDWARDS <mbe at mmo.gr> wrote:
> Dear Council member,
>
> Since I have received Larry's reply, I feel obliged to comment on it.
>
> I am also sad that the exchange on the economics article did not proceed
> differently, although I find it difficult to say that I regret any of my
> decisions or reactions. Perhaps, I would wish a little more patience for
> myself in tolerating amateur interference with expert knowledge; on the
> other hand, perhaps not.
>
> With regard to Larry's role on the Talk page, I can state quite clearly that
> it was ambiguous, overbearing, insistent and lacking in respect for others'
> expertise. If I understood the rationale for his interference, it was that
> he is the founder of CZ and can run it as he sees fit. The other editor and
> I reject the notion that there is an expert view of the matter that is not
> adequately represented in the article, and at no point has Larry or anyone
> else refuted this position. The emailed opinions of the third
> (inactive) editor, I personally found to be ridiculous and not worthy of
> comment; furthermore, I would not accept his publications on the topic as
> scientific publications.
>
> I think it is very clear, just from this current exchange on the Council
> mailing list, that there is a serious problem of a lack of respect of expert
> knowledge by the Editor in Chief. It confirms my belief that it was a
> correct decision to resign from CZ.
>
> I will not participate further in discussion on this or any other matters.
>
> With best wishes
>
> Martin Baldwin-Edwards
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Larry Sanger
> To: 'The Citizendium Editorial Council'
> Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 8:29 PM
> Subject: Re: [Cz-editcouncil] Resignation
> All,
>
> If Martin insists, then for my part, I must accept his resignation with
> sadness and regret, directed both to him and to all of you, that the
> exchange did not proceed differently.  Since his pointed remarks to this
> list might have the tendency to undermine trust in my own leadership,
> however, I feel I must clarify a few points.
>
> First, I must strongly protest as not just incorrect, but as deeply unfair,
> any notion that at any point I made an "abuse of power."  I stated several
> times that I was not acting in my capacity as Editor-in-Chief, and the one
> time in which I did--albeit only temporarily--state that I was resting on my
> authority as EIC, Martin in fact agreed with me, and the other involved
> editor duly revised the article asked.  I then asked that it be expanded
> even further, but this suggestion was rejected by the editors, with my
> agreement.  I must also reject any suggestion that there is anything
> whatsoever improper with the Editor-in-Chief seeking out a third expert
> opinion, particularly from within the CZ editorship.  I should have wished
> that all editors would, far from condemning the addition of further expert
> editors and different viewpoints, actually welcome them.  Moreover, I submit
> that if the Editor-in-Chief believes, in good faith and with what he regards
> as good evidence, that there is an opinion common among some experts that is
> not adequately represented in an article, then he is well within his rights
> to attempt to have the situation rectified--short of actually overruling the
> editors, which I very rarely do and which I did not do in this case.  I
> believed I had excellent evidence that there is another equally expert view
> of the matter in dispute, and a CZ editor who did reply--who has actually
> published articles explaining (what we are calling) the Crash of
> 2008--definitely and strongly confirmed my suspicion.  This, far from being
> in any way untoward, in fact supported my original line of questioning.
> This third editor opted not to participate in the dispute, however, citing
> heavy time burdens, and I did not quote his remarks on the talk page.
> Finally, I merely observe that there is another dimension of this whole
> dispute, which involves Martin's own behavior, but I have no wish to bring
> that up or discuss it here.
>
> You might be interested to know that, as for the content matter that was
> under dispute, the other, still-active editor, who is mostly responsible for
> the "Crash of 2008" article, has very reasonably stated that the burden is
> on me and others to establish that there is a significant expert view that
> needs to be included in the article.  I haven't had time to follow up on
> this, and I have decided to leave the matter to others and to the judgment
> of the editor who is still working on the article.
>
> Best wishes to all,
> Larry
>
> ________________________________
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cz-editcouncil mailing list
> Cz-editcouncil at mail.citizendium.org
> http://mail.citizendium.org/mailman/listinfo/cz-editcouncil
>
> _______________________________________________
> Cz-editcouncil mailing list
> Cz-editcouncil at mail.citizendium.org
> http://mail.citizendium.org/mailman/listinfo/cz-editcouncil
>
>



-- 
David Goodman, Ph.D, M.L.S.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:DGG