In article <robison1.726250071 at husc.harvard.edu>, robison1 at husc10.harvard.edu
(Keith Robison) says:
>> It is rather silly to tell any organization how to run their (bi-)monthly
Forsdyke: No one is trying to do that. The issue is whether PNAS is a special
case to be regarded as an exception even though it appears to
violate Article 1 of a proposed Charter of Authors' Rights.
> Would PNAS be a better journal if it quit being the P of the NAS?
>Undoubtedly, since a great amount of junk and crockery gets published there.
>But it's their right to operate in such an idiosyncratic manner if
>they so choose.
> A charter of Editors' Rights might postulate the right to operate
idiosyncratically. Here there would be a conflict between Author's
Rights and Editor's rights! Note that the FIRST "proceedings", the
Proceedings of the Royal Society, which began in the 17th century, does
not, I believe, demonstrate this idiosyncrasy.