Rejected bionet. postings: double standards
Mahlon G. Kelly
mgk at darwin.clas.Virginia.EDU
Tue Oct 10 11:54:56 EST 1995
grenard at herpmed.com writes:
> I am posting this inquiry here at the suggestion of Una Smith:
> I just received a note from the "BIOSCIAdministrator" rejecting my post for announcing
> a new website where researchers can find very difficult to locate venoms, fractions and
> subfractions which are needed in many important ongoing research applications. It was
> characterized as an "ad." I was perturbed by this since I am constantly treated to
> spams such as Free Cable-TV and people selling magazine subscriptions on these groups.
> This was a legitimate post containing information of great value to bio researchers
> who would be interested in the existence of these substances.
> What I would like to know is why a relevant post like this is rejected and posts like
> Free Cable-TV Send me a Dollar are allowed to get through? DO I have to know somebody?
> Or do I have to resort to some nefarious method to make a legitimate post that these
> spammers use?
> Steve Grenard
> grenard at herpmed.com
I agree with your sentiments. I posted an announcement for very
high-quality microscopes, at very low prices. Una complained
about it, but she was the only one, while several thanked me
for the service and bought the instruments.
It is difficult in the science area to distinguish between a
commercial post that is providing a service and one which is
just trying to make money. Of course both will make money, but
often it is very helpful to scientists to know of sources of
I feel very strongly that there should be some leeway given to
the definition of a commercial post.
I almost posted a message similar to the one above, but decided
to let it be, in the interest of peace and harmony.
Nevertheless, I have to agree strongly with what you are saying.
Associate Professor (Emeritus)
University of Virginia
mgk at darwin.clas.virginia.edu
More information about the Bioforum