Re: Not complicated, weird situation

jstevh_at_msn.com
Date: 04/06/05 

Date: 6 Apr 2005 04:20:16 -0700

Proginoskes wrote:
> jstevh@msn.com wrote:
> > Gonçalo Rodrigues wrote:
> > > On 4 Apr 2005 19:33:00 -0700, jstevh@msn.com fed this
> > > fish to the
> > > penguins:
> > >
> > > [snip]
> > >
> > > >Sure, none of you care about me, or the pressure I'm under.
> > > >Can you imagine being in my situation?
> > > >
> > >
> > > It must be hard being you. But not for the reasons you state.
> > >
> > > >I'm sure 99.9% of you would fall to pieces, to have incredible
> > > >results and face such bizarre opposition.
> > > >
> > > >Maybe I'm getting a little nutty myself, but that's neither
> > > >here nor there.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Maybe you should consider that hypothesis seriously. Maybe you
> > > are nutty. Or, something milder maybe, as in... I don't know,
> > > a crank?
> > >
> >
> > Yeah, a "crank" with one paper accepted then rejected,
>
> Submitting papers with errors in them doesn't count. You're at 0,
> bucko.
>

Wait a minute, what happened isn't that easy to dismiss, with some
commentary.

It's like some of you are mentally lazy on a very high scale.

Actually, a small electronic math journal which claimed to have two
referees look at every paper, published my paper after having it for
nine months.

I was in contact with that journal over that period and received
assurances from the editors that despite my being an amateur, they
would act fairly.

The chief editor emails me to congratulate me on publication and tells
me the reviewers liked it and it's a nice paper. Another editor in
reply to my effusive thanks says that what is mathematically correct is
what's important, without regard to the person making the discovery.

Then someone posts on sci.math about the paper being published.

Several posters berate the journal and its editors, and some decide to
send emails claiming the argument is wrong and that they refuted it on
the newsgroup.

They convince the chief editor overnight, he yanks my paper, and
doesn't even allow me to defend.

Literally overnight, nine months of waiting, down the toilet.

It turns out that the emailers have mislead him, as I explained in
detailed postings after I got over being truly pissed, and I just wrote
another paper covering that areas and more, which the Annals of
Mathematics accepted for formal peer review last year.

Now that you dismiss that entire story in a couple of sentences tells
the real story.

People like you don't even try to be rational, or to give the full
story, but instead work to mislead other people by giving tidbits of
information.

James Harris