Subject: Re: Amused by critic of abstracting service
Date: Jan 12 08:33:12 1997
From: Mike Patterson - mpatters at orednet.org




Yes, I was kind of taken aback as well.

When I was abstracting journal (which I've since given up because Jon is
far more thorough and concsienscious), I got nothing but thank you's.

I think it's time to explain things once again to all the new arrivals to
listservs in Oregon and Washington. We represent a diversity of interests.
A significant segment finds the abstracting of birding and biological
journals useful and interesting. Yes, some of the articles are about
"furin" birds, but many of these species have what we biologists like to
call analogues here (though they may not necessarily be birds).

Those who don't find abstracting useful may execise their right as Americans
and skip those files, deleting them unread.

Those who monitor BIRDCHAT will back me up, I think, when I say that we
should consider ourselves lucky that worst we have to put up with is an
effort like Jon's to increase our information base. We could be listening
to bad (and very old) bird fanatic jokes.



>
>
> I'm another fan of Jon Anderson's scientific abstracting service,
> and I was amused by the criticism of the unnamed critic that Jon
> quoted in his posting earlier today.
>
> "Perhaps I am speaking only for myself," said the unnamed critic,
> "but I'm not at all sure that this list is the proper place to
> download a publication that deals largely with exotica and species
> that most of us will never chase and really have no interest in.
> I happen to have unlimited time use of AOL, but many don't and join
> the list to use their time allottment efficiently to learn about
> bird sightings."
>
> Because tweeters is precisely the place to discuss the contents
> of technical publications, to join the fray in the dreaded cat thread
> or to indulge in the occasional outbreak of puns, to debate avian
> adaptive evolution, to cheer on the rehabilitation of the Montlake
> Fill, to digress into musings on disappearing amphibians, to anticipate
> Dennis Paulson's work on dragonflies--well, you get the idea.
>
> I must suppose that Jon's unnamed critic is not particularly familiar
> with the spirit and history of Tweeters and has confused Tweeters
> with some other list.
>
> Thanks, Jon.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Jim Lyles jrlyles at eskimo.com
> Tacoma, WA <Editing isn't pretty.> jrlyles at usgs.gov
>
>
>
>
>
>

--
*********************************** I was of three minds
* Mike Patterson, Astoria, OR * like a tree
* mpatters at orednet.org * in which there are three blackbirds.
*http://www.pacifier.com/~mpatters* -Wallace Stevens