>>I have no strong views one way or other, but if yourself, WW and David Williams (and anyone else) can form a consensus one way or other and it appears half reasonable, I'll certainly look to it as a guideline in future.



Ray,



Like BGF said, there is no major mystery about this, and the consensus about this in the scientific community is unanimous: you do your homework, get ALL the evidence you need, and then submit to a peer-reviewed journal.



Yes, it does take time (probably 1-1 1/2 years from submission to publication in most journals), but on the other hand, your new taxon will be rapidly accepted, instead of giving rise to years of bickering. And yes, thet is the unanimously accepted procedure in the scientific community. It works very well, by and large, provided everybody plays by the rules.



As to publishing in your own journal, I would regard that as a no-no, due to conflict of interest - why should the editor get sopecial treatment when publishing a paper? I now happen to edit the Herpetological journal, and I can assure you that in ordinary circumstances, I would never consider publishing a paper int hat Journal while I am the editor.



As I have said before, a name published in haste and without sufficient backing evidence is of no use to anyone. A good species description with ample evidence may take more time, but it will also do a lot more good.



That is the way the scientific community works. The question is, do you want to be part of it?



Cheers,



Wolfgang
-----
WW



WW Home

[ Show Entire Thread ]