Role of Message Boards in Disseminating New Research

[Ally]

There are lots of pros and cons, and there's no need to have one to the exclusion of the other. It's true that a magazine article is sometimes seen as more prestigious, mainly I suppose because it has to be passed by the editor as good enough to publish (unless the editor is desperate!). .

No way! No Ripper magazine would ever publish rubbish just to fill a page quota! Blasphemy to even suggest such a thought would ever cross their minds!

[Robert]

Hmm...bang goes my "Was JTR A One-legged Somnambulist?" article. Unless I can trim it down...

[Roy Corduroy]

I still think most people would prefer that their findings be posted in an official publication as it is more "prestigious" that way, and most people involved with the case have that kind of ego that makes that desirable and finds their worth in being a "published" author.

I want those people to get a lift from publishing. They deserve it. Calling that an ego trip cheapens the whole thing.

Roy

[Ally]

Please explain precisely what the difference is between an "ego trip" and an act undertaken that provides the ego with a" lift"? And how precisely one is cheap, while the other is not? I believe this is one of those cases where I am confused by meaningless euphemisms designed to gloss over the exact nature of what is occurring.

[Roy Corduroy]

Explain myself? Sure Ally, no problem.

If everytime I read Ripperologist, or for that matter, when I read Casebook Examiner, which I enjoyed, I have to stop and think:

most people would prefer that their findings be posted in an official publication as it is more "prestigious" that way, and most people involved with the case have that kind of ego that makes that desirable and finds their worth in being a "published" author.

that kind of ego

What on earth good does this sort of judgemental attitude do for me the reader and paid subscriber? Nothing. So yes, exactly as I said, if they get a lift from seeing their work published, good for them.

Roy

[Errata]

Well, I'm not an academic by nature, so I don't really have any desire to publish anything I might find. Of course the nature of my interest in the case pretty much guarantees that I'm not going to have a line of research that lends itself to publishing.

But the few times I have been running down a theory or a possibility I have found that I get blinded by my own view. I need other people to poke holes in my theories. If it can't withstand the beating of you guys and all your different takes on these crimes, then I need to abandon the idea. I mean, the theory doesn't have to remain unblemished after a week or so on here, but it needs to still be standing. So I think the boards are good for that.

Then again, I'm never going to be one of those people who publishes something, so I have very little invested in keeping my ideas mine.

[lynn cates]

stay awhile

Hello Errata.

"I need other people to poke holes in my theories. If it can't withstand the beating of you guys and all your different takes on these crimes, then I need to abandon the idea."

Well, you are certainly in the right place. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

[Supe]

I may be biased as I am an editor of a magazine in the field, but there is somethimng to be said for both approaches to disseminating information.

Certainly, simply posting on a message board affords one the greatest immediacy and that often looms large. Getting there "fustest" (if not necessarily with the "mostest") can be of prime importance at times.

The advantages of publishing in a magazine, however, are many. To begin with, articles are filtered through several editors and this should ensure far fewer errors of both omission and commision while providing elements of peer review on a personal basis. Moreover, most articles benefit greatly from accompanying illustrations and an easy-to-read format. Also, even in this age of electronic publishing, there is a real permanence to a magazine article in both perception and actual fact.

I quite sympathise with Debs' lament about researchers not always getting credit. While at Examiner and now at Indy Review we make an effort to see that the original research on a topic is credited. And if it isn't there is nothing wrong with a researcher writing an editor to establish primacy. I would certainly welcome that.

In the end, though, we need both message boards and magazines.

Don Souden,
New Independent Review.

[Errata]

Hello Errata.

"I need other people to poke holes in my theories. If it can't withstand the beating of you guys and all your different takes on these crimes, then I need to abandon the idea."

Well, you are certainly in the right place. (heh-heh)

Cheers.
LC

It comes from spending a good portion of my life in a job where I have to produce miracles on no budget all of which have the potential to literally poke someone's eye out. If I don't have a bunch of people trying to break it before it debuts, then I'm going to have explain to some dumb teenager's mom why her son has a screw imbedded in his right buttock. And no left eye.

Personally I think a lot of theories could use the gauntlet. Then I wouldn't have to devote two whole neurons to the notion that someone wrote a book saying Van Gogh was JtR.

[Ally]

Explain myself? Sure Ally, no problem.

If everytime I read Ripperologist, or for that matter, when I read Casebook Examiner, which I enjoyed, I have to stop and think:





What on earth good does this sort of judgemental attitude do for me the reader and paid subscriber? Nothing. So yes, exactly as I said, if they get a lift from seeing their work published, good for them.

Roy

I am sorry, I didn't realize you were one of those people who believe having an ego is BAD thing. The words "that kind of ego" are absolutely no different than "that kind of blouse" or "that kind of bubblegum" . The judgement imbued by those words was PURELY your own.

There are many different kinds of egos in the worlds. I merely said that the majority of people involved in the case have the type of ego that wants to see their name in a published magazine. YOU were the one who read that as a negative. I would hardly be calling it a negative, personally, since I am friends with several of the people who have published those articles, and happen to be married to someone who has published stuff, so what precisely makes you think I'd be insulting them?

[lynn cates]

fire power

Hello Errata. Yes. Imagine a world where all useless suspects were discarded and more fire power were aimed at the serious ones.

Cheers.
LC

[Errata]

Hello Errata. Yes. Imagine a world where all useless suspects were discarded and more fire power were aimed at the serious ones.

Cheers.
LC

yeah, or we abandoned suspects all together and decided to put our minds towards applying the lessons learned, eliminating the wrongs done during the investigative process and wiping out both assumed and actual bias from the investigations of crime.

but that sounds exhausting. So lets just agree it wasn't Van Gogh.

[Wickerman]

But the few times I have been running down a theory or a possibility I have found that I get blinded by my own view. I need other people to poke holes in my theories.

Hi Errata.
And, there are a few theories out there that have been put in print which would have seriously benefitted from chewing it over with their peers.
Perhaps, some of these people think they have no peers?

Regardless, if anyone chooses to be perfectly honest, all theories can be refined & improved by debate on the message boards. Its a great medium for sorting the wheat from the chaff. Everybody suffers from tunnel vision when they keep their ideas in solitude.

If it can't withstand the beating of you guys and all your different takes on these crimes, then I need to abandon the idea.

Agreed, or, more evidence is required in certain areas, more examples to demonstrate the viability?
Putting your ideas in print helps to encapsulate the whole picture in one place, whereas chewing over specifics with others helps to shape the hypothesis.
There's a place for both the print medium & the instant feedback of the message boards.

Regards, Jon S.

[Debra A]

I quite sympathise with Debs' lament about researchers not always getting credit. While at Examiner and now at Indy Review we make an effort to see that the original research on a topic is credited. And if it isn't there is nothing wrong with a researcher writing an editor to establish primacy. I would certainly welcome that.

In the end, though, we need both message boards and magazines.

Don Souden,
New Independent Review.

The magazines aren't the problem, Don.

[Scott Nelson]

Yes....yes, of course they aren't, Debs.