In response to several questions I've received by e-mail:
Yes, please send your votes both to me (chlamy at acpub.duke.edu) and to
Colorado (kmills at beagle.colorado.edu). This double-checking is to ensure
an accurate count.
Anyone with a serious interest in the topic is welcome to vote. We trust
you not to round up dozens of undergraduates to stuff the ballot box, and
we realize that today's graduate students and post-docs are the people who
will be living with this nomenclature as lab heads in years to come, and
thus should be able to express an opinion. But please, if you are sending
more than one vote from the same e-mail address, put a name at the top of
each ballot so that we do count each separately in the total.
"yes" or an "x" after "in favor" is sufficient; you don't need to mark the
"opposed" blank "no" also if you're in favor of an option.
So far as I am concerned, items 5 and 6 (-d, -r for dominant and recessive
alleles; :: for insertions) are optional conventions for published papers
that would add some information on a particular allele. In the database,
the primary information for allele abc1-1::Gulliver would be found under
abc1:1, but there could also be a way to search for all mutants generated
by Gulliver insertion.
Early next week I will try to contact all major Chlamy labs who have not
yet responded to the vote request, to make sure that the ballot information
has been received. Please, either send in your vote, or send me a message
that you're not interested at all (of course, if you've read this far, you
probably ARE interested...)
chlamy at acpub.duke.edu