[Taxacom] [iczn-list] provisions to the Code
Richard Pyle
deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
Wed Apr 16 15:11:42 CDT 2014
2014
Hi Wolfgang,
Like Michael, I promised myself not to get dragged in to this; but his post
(which represents my views as well) have emboldened me a bit.
The answer to your question, I think, has nothing to do with "because that's
how it's always been"; and much more to do with putting the interests of
what I think of as "long term" stability ahead of "short term" stability in
nomenclature.
A solution to whatever controversial nomenclatural issue du jour happens to
be (in this case, there seems to be an epicenter of noise in the
herpetological domain), while placating frustrated workers caught up in the
cross-fire, would necessarily involve some assertive force that operates
somewhat heavily on subjective interpretation (see Michael's post below).
It may well be that an overwhelming majority of current workers maintain a
common consensus view, to the point where such a solution would appear to
fall into the realm of "common sense"; but nevertheless the tyranny of the
(even vast) majority is still tyranny.
OK, "tyranny" is too strong of a word. But subjectivity is nevertheless a
detriment to long-term stability, even when it can serve the needs of
short-term stability. The Code is not devoid of subjectivity, of course.
This is why there are provisions to allow the Commission to exercise plenary
powers. But the Commission has tended to maintain a very conservative
approach on such matters (witness the Drosophila example); and in my
opinion, this is the way it should be, with the priority being on long-term
stability. In this context, "long-term" stability is served by maximizing
objectivity, and minimizing the introduction of subjectivity. The messiest
parts of the Code (i.e., the ones that have caused the greatest problems)
are the ones that require elevated levels of subjective interpretation
(e.g., prevailing usage clauses).
It has never been, and never will be, a perfect system. It will always be a
case of the lesser of evils. So I don't think it's "resignation" that
Michael, and I, and others share towards the plight of the [insert group
suffering from some controversy or another]ologists; it's more a recognition
that the costs of solving the short-term stability issues via subjective
approaches, are too large in terms of their threat to long-term stability.
And quite frankly, I see a few hundred (or even a few tens of thousands of)
synonymous names as the lesser of evils against the context of a system
designed to promote long-term stability among MILLIONS of names.
Also, as others have stated or alluded to, the job of the Code is not to
eliminate bad taxonomy. There always have been, currently are, and always
will be bad taxonomists. It is the job of the scientific community to
establish mechanism that help promote good taxonomy and reduce bad taxonomy.
This is outside the scope of the Code.
Aloha,
Rich
> -----Original Message-----
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-
> bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Wolfgang Wuster
> Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2014 8:59 AM
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] [iczn-list] provisions to the Code
>
> Well, I certainly commiserate with the coleopterologists out there.
>
> However, it does beg the deeper question of why on Earth we are putting up
> with a system that inflicts tens of thousands of names emanating from
> unscientific outputs upon us. Is this really the best that a system with
> "standards, sense and stability for animal names" as its aims can do? And
> should we be accepting "because that's how it's always been" as the sole
> justification for tolerating it forever more?
>
> I'm afraid I find that level of resignation immeasurably depressing. And I
envy
> bacterial taxonomists
.
>
> Wolfgang
>
> ________________________________________
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu <taxacom-
> bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> on behalf of Michael A. Ivie
> <mivie at montana.edu>
> Sent: 16 April 2014 19:06
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] [iczn-list] provisions to the Code
>
> OK, everyone step back and breath. This is not that simple. How much
> worse is AJH than Calodema? How much worse is Calodema than M?langes
> Exotico-Entomologiques? Than L'?change? Those last 2 journals, privately
> published by the author of tens of thousands of poorly documented species
> were proposed for suppression decades ago, and that was voted down.
> What about the allegedly back-dated "Cicindelidae:
> Bulletin of Worldwide Research"? If I remember correctly, some
> Scandinavian acarologist who published a large number of very poor
> descriptions ordered his types all destroyed upon his death.
> Herpetologists have probably never heard of these other journals/cases and
> don't care about them, but the the same applies by non-herpetologists
> about AJH. Once you decide that AJH is so bad it has to be placed on the
list
> of rejected works in its entirety, what about the next-worst? And, the
next
> worst? Every sub-discipline has a journal or person that they think is
the
> worst. This proposal will never pass, with good, practical reasons.
>
> Today, declaring an entire journal with a living editor to be placed on
the list
> of rejected publications will do nothing. Next week a newly named journal
> will appear and revalidate all the names. Rejecting the names one by one
> would be a better solution, although I do not see anything to keep them
> from being repeated next week as well. As for extending the ban into the
> future, to invalidate works not yet published is indeed censorship. We
call it
> a gag rule. I am wondering if any work by a living author has ever been
> placed on the rejected list contrary to their wishes? Has it ever been
done
> that names proposed by a certain person are placed on the rejected list
for
> simply being named by that person, both those already published and those
> that may be published in the future? When a work is placed on the
rejected
> list, a reason is given, Geoffroy for not being consistently binomial,
etc.
> What reason will be given for AJH? "Unpopular Editor" would be pretty
weak
> in a 100 years.
>
> If coleopterists can survive 38,000 Pic names, herpetologists can survive
a
> mere 600 Hoser names. And yes, the Macrochelys is valid. Live with it.
>
> Mike (who swore he was not getting into this)
>
> On 4/16/2014 1:16 AM, Stephen Thorpe wrote:
> > Hold on, it would still solve many of the problems, as he cannot publish
> again giving the names the same priority. It would at least solve the
> Macrochelys case.
> >
> > Stephen
> >
> > --------------------------------------------
> > On Wed, 16/4/14, Philipp Wagner <philipp.wagner.zfmk at uni-bonn.de>
> wrote:
> >
> > Subject: Re: [Taxacom] [iczn-list] provisions to the Code
> > To: "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>, "Wolfgang
> Wuster" <w.wuster at bangor.ac.uk>, "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu"
> <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> > Received: Wednesday, 16 April, 2014, 6:41 AM
> >
> > > All they need do is deem his
> > journal AJH to be an invalid publication.
> >
> > That would be great - but it would not stop him. In a time
> > where it is so extremly easy to run a self-published
> > e-journal he would just rename it and publish everything
> > again.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Wolfgang Wuster <w.wuster at bangor.ac.uk>
> > > To: "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu"
> > <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> > Sent: Wednesday, 16 April 2014 6:10 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [Taxacom] [iczn-list] provisions to the
> > Code
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ________________________________________
> > > From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > <taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> > on behalf of Neal Evenhuis <neale at bishopmuseum.org>
> > > Sent: 15 April 2014 23:12
> > > To: Stephen Thorpe; Doug Yanega; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > > Subject: Re: [Taxacom] [iczn-list] provisions to the
> > Code
> > >
> > >
> > >> But to get back to the crux of the matter. Some on
> > the list want to nix
> > >> what Hoser has done because they claim the specimen
> > (with a specimen
> > >> number) that he specifically designated "did not
> > exist". That is hogwash.
> > >> And is bordering on censorship, in my opinion.
> > >
> > > I think we need to stop this talk of censorship.
> > >
> > > According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, "to
> > censor" is defined as "to examine books, movies, letters,
> > etc., in order to remove things that are considered to be
> > offensive, immoral, harmful to society, etc."
> > >
> > > Nobody is proposing to do such a thing.
> > >
> > > However, there is a difference between the right to
> > free expression and the right to be taken seriously. The
> > former is (in my book) absolute, the latter does not exist.
> > The problem is that the letter of the Code seeks to bestow
> > that non-existing latter right on the authors of names
> > irrespective of merit. That's what many who consider
> > themselves scientists first and nomenclaturists second have
> > a problem with. However, that does not constitute
> > censorship.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Wolfgang
> > >
> > >
> > > Rhif Elusen Gofrestredig 1141565 - Registered Charity
> > No. 1141565
> > >
> > > Gall y neges e-bost hon, ac unrhyw atodiadau a anfonwyd
> > gyda hi, gynnwys deunydd cyfrinachol ac wedi eu bwriadu i'w
> > defnyddio'n unig gan y sawl y cawsant eu cyfeirio ato
> > (atynt). Os ydych wedi derbyn y neges e-bost hon trwy
> > gamgymeriad, rhowch wybod i'r anfonwr ar unwaith a dilewch y
> > neges. Os na fwriadwyd anfon y neges atoch chi, rhaid i chi
> > beidio a defnyddio, cadw neu ddatgelu unrhyw wybodaeth a
> > gynhwysir ynddi. Mae unrhyw farn neu safbwynt yn eiddo i'r
> > sawl a'i hanfonodd yn unig ac nid yw o anghenraid yn
> > cynrychioli barn Prifysgol Bangor. Nid yw Prifysgol Bangor
> > yn gwarantu bod y neges e-bost hon neu unrhyw atodiadau yn
> > rhydd rhag firysau neu 100% yn ddiogel. Oni bai fod hyn wedi
> > ei ddatgan yn uniongyrchol yn nhestun yr e-bost, nid bwriad
> > y neges e-bost hon yw ffurfio contract rhwymol - mae rhestr
> > o lofnodwyr awdurdodedig ar gael o Swyddfa Cyllid Prifysgol
> > Bangor.
> > >
> > > This email and any attachments may contain confidential
> > material and is solely for the use of the intended
> > recipient(s). If you have received this email in error,
> > please notify the sender immediately and delete this email.
> > If you are not the intended recipient(s), you must not use,
> > retain or disclose any information contained in this email.
> > Any views or opinions are solely those of the sender and do
> > not necessarily represent those of Bangor University. Bangor
> > University does not guarantee that this email or any
> > attachments are free from viruses or 100% secure. Unless
> > expressly stated in the body of the text of the email, this
> > email is not intended to form a binding contract - a list of
> > authorised signatories is available from the Bangor
> > University Finance Office.
> > >
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Taxacom Mailing List
> > > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org/
> > >
> > > Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Taxacom Mailing List
> > > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> > >
> > > Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
> >
> > ----------------------------------------
> > Dr. Philipp Wagner
> > [www.philippwagner.net]
> >
> > Research Associate:
> > Department of Biology
> > Villanova University
> > 800 Lancaster Avenue
> > Villanova, Pennsylvania 19085, USA
> >
> > Home Institution:
> > Zoologisches Forschungsmuseum Alexander Koenig
> > Adenauerallee 160
> > D-53113 Bonn
> > Deutschland
> >
> > +49 228 9122 254
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Taxacom Mailing List
> > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> > http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >
> > Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
> >
> > .
> >
>
> --
> __________________________________________________
>
> Michael A. Ivie, Ph.D., F.R.E.S.
>
> Montana Entomology Collection
> Marsh Labs, Room 50
> 1911 West Lincoln Street
> NW corner of Lincoln and S.19th
> Montana State University
> Bozeman, MT 59717
> USA
>
> (406) 994-4610 (voice)
> (406) 994-6029 (FAX)
> mivie at montana.edu
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
>
>
> Rhif Elusen Gofrestredig 1141565 - Registered Charity No. 1141565
>
> Gall y neges e-bost hon, ac unrhyw atodiadau a anfonwyd gyda hi, gynnwys
> deunydd cyfrinachol ac wedi eu bwriadu i'w defnyddio'n unig gan y sawl y
> cawsant eu cyfeirio ato (atynt). Os ydych wedi derbyn y neges e-bost hon
> trwy gamgymeriad, rhowch wybod i'r anfonwr ar unwaith a dilewch y neges.
> Os na fwriadwyd anfon y neges atoch chi, rhaid i chi beidio a defnyddio,
cadw
> neu ddatgelu unrhyw wybodaeth a gynhwysir ynddi. Mae unrhyw farn neu
> safbwynt yn eiddo i'r sawl a'i hanfonodd yn unig ac nid yw o anghenraid yn
> cynrychioli barn Prifysgol Bangor. Nid yw Prifysgol Bangor yn gwarantu bod
y
> neges e-bost hon neu unrhyw atodiadau yn rhydd rhag firysau neu 100% yn
> ddiogel. Oni bai fod hyn wedi ei ddatgan yn uniongyrchol yn nhestun yr e-
> bost, nid bwriad y neges e-bost hon yw ffurfio contract rhwymol - mae
rhestr
> o lofnodwyr awdurdodedig ar gael o Swyddfa Cyllid Prifysgol Bangor.
>
> This email and any attachments may contain confidential material and is
> solely for the use of the intended recipient(s). If you have received this
email
> in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this email. If
you
> are not the intended recipient(s), you must not use, retain or disclose
any
> information contained in this email. Any views or opinions are solely
those of
> the sender and do not necessarily represent those of Bangor University.
> Bangor University does not guarantee that this email or any attachments
are
> free from viruses or 100% secure. Unless expressly stated in the body of
the
> text of the email, this email is not intended to form a binding contract -
a list
> of authorised signatories is available from the Bangor University Finance
> Office.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Celebrating 27 years of Taxacom in 2014.
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list