tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post4190995080921058326..comments2024-03-19T03:14:04.172-04:00Comments on Rabett Run: What's too far said heEliRabetthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-65361746154881738612011-10-24T01:38:56.061-04:002011-10-24T01:38:56.061-04:00Nonny, yeah...but you should look at the original ...Nonny, yeah...but you should look at the original discussion. If anything your comment supports how I called out Eli.TCOnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-54855665170239552912011-10-05T00:27:18.140-04:002011-10-05T00:27:18.140-04:00DC has the thorough, but suboptimal, story.DC has the <a href="http://deepclimate.org/2011/10/04/said-and-wegman-2009-suboptimal-scholarship/" rel="nofollow">thorough, but suboptimal, story</a>.John Masheynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-33507006888643502932011-09-29T14:47:14.626-04:002011-09-29T14:47:14.626-04:00The weird thing is the mix of articles at WIRES:CS...The weird thing is the mix of articles at WIRES:CS:<br />1) A majority look like good reviews by experts who have written on the topics often. Over at Gelman's, I noted an example with Dave Lilja writing on a topic in which I have some experience. If someone had asked me who should write that review, I would have pointed at him.<br /><br />2) A few are Wegman/Said things that cannot have been reviewed in any rational way.<br /><br />3) As of April, there were 156 articles:<br />4 were by Wegman/Said<br />14 were by Wegman students<br />8 involved other Wegman coauthors<br />1 by a Said coauthor<br />6 by others at GMU<br />===<br />33 total, 21% of the 156<br /><br />6 by Scott<br />1 by a Scott student<br />2 by Scott coauthors<br />1 by Scott colleague at Rice<br />===<br />10 total, 6.4%<br /><br />===<br />43 overall total, 27.6% of the 156.<br /><br />That may be perfectly OK (Wegman & Scott are distinguished statisticians with many students and it is perfectly reasonable to ask some associates to write reviews) or some of these may be over the edge into crony-invites that helps boost "peer-reviewed" pub counts. Too many of the topics are ones where I don't have the expertise to know offhand.<br /><br />I found 75 mentions of WIRES:CS articles in people's CV's.<br />3 invited<br />45 ambiguous (many CV's don't distinguish).<br />27 refereed/reviewed, including 5 of Scott's 6.<br /><br />Anyway, my take is that most of the articles look pretty reasonable, although from outside, the quality of peer-review is unclear.John Masheynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-35871929520018631062011-09-29T00:09:29.040-04:002011-09-29T00:09:29.040-04:00You are all a pack of cards!<i>You are all a pack of cards!</i>David B. Bensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02917182411282836875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-45911634352422419072011-09-28T22:29:16.194-04:002011-09-28T22:29:16.194-04:00TCO could have figured out the answer to his heat ...TCO could have figured out the answer to his heat capacity conundrum by now. 93% of the the heat absorbed is in the high heat capacity place. However, a very slow process, with a time constant of years or decades.<br /><br />Rib smokin' bunny.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-15920137774464767862011-09-28T22:12:03.122-04:002011-09-28T22:12:03.122-04:00Is this Wonderland?Is this Wonderland?David B. Bensonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02917182411282836875noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-56050944419682539152011-09-28T21:12:57.007-04:002011-09-28T21:12:57.007-04:00Man, I want to physically box or wrestle my own si...Man, I want to physically box or wrestle my own side. they are such limpdicks.<br /><br />And then after that "scary Eli", you still owe heat capicity responses from Deltoid from 2006. Don't think I forgot, little one.TCOnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-29113349980536862952011-09-28T21:07:59.400-04:002011-09-28T21:07:59.400-04:00I swear. There were 2 identical posts. Once.I swear. There were 2 identical posts. Once.Jeffrey Davishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966839006518642902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-24401643857285054972011-09-28T17:27:08.160-04:002011-09-28T17:27:08.160-04:00Wrong John? Let us investigate that for 18+ months...Wrong John? Let us investigate that for 18+ months.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-62021268338272230972011-09-28T16:57:17.820-04:002011-09-28T16:57:17.820-04:00? Wrong John, not me.? Wrong John, not me.John Masheynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-31743435532894620962011-09-28T16:00:16.855-04:002011-09-28T16:00:16.855-04:00It looks like John Mashey plagiarized himself up t...It looks like John Mashey plagiarized himself up there. <br /><br />"The doctor turned to the other doctors with amazement. 'He<br />does see everything once!' he exclaimed. 'We made him all better.'"<br /><br />-from the best catch there is.Jeffrey Davishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17966839006518642902noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-84205279854232256922011-09-28T15:38:46.633-04:002011-09-28T15:38:46.633-04:00Is it "editorial bored" or "editori...Is it "editorial bored" or "editorial board"? <br /><br />Hummmmm<br /><br />I better look this up, on Wikipedia (where else?).Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09575837647825433144noreply@blogger.com