[Taxacom] "Taxon Filter" (was Re: Electronic publication)

[Adam Cotton]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard Pyle" <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org>
To: "'Neal Evenhuis'" <neale at bishopmuseum.org>; "'Doug Yanega'" 
<dyanega at ucr.edu>; <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Sent: Friday, January 13, 2017 2:24 AM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] "Taxon Filter" (was Re: Electronic publication)
>
> The way I imagine it working for such cases is that there would be a 
> defined time-period of, say, one month where people could comment on each 
> registration record.  If that period expires without a minimum number of 
> comments (>1, but not sure how much more than one), then then name is 
> automatically accepted (i.e., newly proposed names are available until 
> proven unavailable, which is how the system has always been).  I don't 
> think the problem will be with the names that nobody reviews.  I think the 
> problem will be the ones that have MANY reviews, with no clear consensus. 
> This will be PARTICULARLY problematic if too much "taxonomy" is entangled 
> with the nomenclatural process (e.g., I foresee endless splitter vs. 
> lumper debates).
>
>
>


This is precisely why, in my opinion, it is VERY important that whatever 
system is adopted to supercede the current traditional one it must only 
concern itself with NOMENCLATURE. Any taxonomic considerations, such as 
those "splitter vs. lumper" issues, should be completely excluded from the 
whole process.

If there is a time period for comments on any submissions for registration 
those comments should be restricted to nomenclatural issues only, and any 
comments of a taxonomic nature should be discarded.

Currently anyone can name what is in their opinion a new taxon, and whether 
or not the taxon is regarded as valid or not is in the realm of taxonomy, 
not nomenclature. Any new system must continue to separate these two issues, 
particularly since with new techniques it is often found that what was 
previously considered a junior synonym is actually a valid separate taxon. 
It would be incorrect for a nomenclatural registration to be rejected 
because the reviewers disgree on taxonomic grounds.

Adam.