I am a graduate student and a newcomer to e-mail and the BIONEWS
network
> (i.e. I'm not sure I am even sending this correctly...but, I'll try
> anyway). I have found much of the discussion interesting and productive
> minus the personal attacks and the inflammatory word choices, and I wish
> to comment on Dave Adler's response to article
> <23c45cINN8m1 at minerva.cis.yale.edu> by asking a question:
>> Does it make sense to eliminate or combat discrimination by discriminating?
>> What I mean is: isn't it more productive to "not notice the sex ratio" or
> any ratio for that matter?
>> I believe that paper selection, job selection should be based on merits
> regardless of background, name, gender, ethnic, or cultural background.
> To clarify what I'm suggesting further, selection processes should be a
> blind process in which quality and contribution are emphasized over an
> individuals "prominence." If only 3 people of one particular background
> present (i.e. gender-male or female) out of 30 presentations than so be it-as
> long as quality papers are chosen. How else can science progress?
I would
> be disappointed to go to a conference or a meeting in which a number of
> poor papers were presented in order to maintain a qouta system. It's a
> conundrum of sorts. Discrimination exists, but to try and eliminate it by
> discriminating, is like exposing oneself to a lethal disease to dispell a
> lethal disease.
>>Adam Porth
Idaho State University
Campus Box 8007
Pocatello, ID 83209
(208)236-4061
>
