Please, press F5 button to see a new version of the page.
Your responses.
╣ |
The member of the questionnaire. |
The point of the questionnaire member. |
1 |
Golounin Alexander Vasilievich, Job Organization: Scientific degree: Doctor of Chemical
Science, professor; Job position: the Leading Scientific Worker; e-mail: golounin@icct.ru |
I support the idea of the discussion forums
at all scientific journals and Internet scientific journals, also. I believe that it is expedient to take into
account (in course of the defenses of scientific degrees) papers published at
such forums if they (papers) were approved by leading scientists. I offer to
recommend to Higher Certifying Commission (HCC) to include such discussion
forums in the list of admissible editions. |
2 |
Pogodaev Vladimir Petrovich, Job Organization: printing plant УAtlasФ; Scientific Degree: candidate of chemical
science; Job position: manager; e-mail: VPogodaev@atlas-krk.ru |
The present situation of Russian science is
the source of clans, contractual defenses of dissertations, concentrating
wanted (obsequious, appeasable) stupid people around scientific bureaucrats
that have a power. Such wanted peoples become candidates and doctors of
sciences. The enterprising, talented peoples are forced to leave science.
Pitiful sight of small groups of people trying to keep near
the scientific pork and to have maximum profit from it (by means of different
titles and positions) take place as a result. Thus, the possibility of
open discussion and free exchange of views (in legal form) in Internet will
prevent and maybe eliminate the possibility to make clans and servility
around scientific bureaucrats. |
3 |
Susoev Anatoliy Mihaylovich, Job Organization: Job Position: the leading Engineer; e-mail: ivan@akadem.ru |
I share this site founderТs opinion. Their
tasks are actual and vital. |
4 |
Poliak-Braginsky Nikolay Vladimirovich, Job Organization: Siberian Plant of Heavy
Engineering Industry; Job Position: the Chief of Programming Office
of Construction Department of Automatic Control Systems Scientific Degree: no e-mail: polak47@mail.ru |
I agree with the suggested system of
publication. The estimation of work must take into account qualification of
reviewers. |
5 |
Abolin Oleg Eduardovich Job Organization: Public Corporation
УChemical-Metallurgical PlanФ Scientific Degree: Candidate of Chemical
Science; Job Position: Engineer - Methodologist e-mail: abolin@bk.ru |
I was surprised that this question wasnТt
discussed in Internet yet (it maybe discussed, I donТt check it). I
completely agree with all proposals (offered by the site authors), concerned
with the change of the present system of publication and estimation of
scientific papers. However, I think that a forum is necessary for this site.
Russian forum is necessary for Russian part of the site and English Forum for
other part of the site. Different scientists can write their notes to such
forums, that language they know. The interaction between these part of the site is the problem of the authors of the
site. IТd like, also, to offer to make a database, containing information
about different rejected (by different publishers) papers (the reasons of
rejection, editors names, time of papers submission, author-editor
correspondence, papers texts). |
6 |
Job Organization: KACST |
I think it is a great project to develop new
standards for the scientific publications taking into consideration the new communication
technology to get red of old fashion process that still in use for referring
and evaluating scientific publications. You have presented a good number of
reasons and justifications for this change. An international efforts and
recognition has to made to change the old system.
Good luck. |
7 |
Doctorovich Thinoviy Isaacovich Job Organization: research-and-production
association УPulsarФ Job Position: scientific worker Scientific Degree: e-mail: zinovy@doktorovich.info |
I believe that this undertaking is necessary
and brewing a long time ago. I think that these reforms will allow to use the
real democratic possibilities (given to scientific community by Internet) of
Internet with more profit. |
8 |
Tan Cao Tran Organization: Retired Professor |
I agree with most of your proposals. |
9 |
Ruslan Sharipov Organization: Job Position: associate professor e-mail: r-sharipov@mail.ru |
I strongly support your project. I think it
is urgent and quite up to date. |
10 |
Dr Doak PhD Organization: Celequintial
Research Lab e-mail: DrDoakPhd@yahoo.com |
It is in my opinion that the elemental point
of view of the revision of the present system is that we should. In saying this what we are really saying is that what is, is in fact
not. We must then bring to attention the fact that what may or may not be
could have no parallax consequence to the estimation of scientific papers. |
11 |
Anatoliy Rukov Organization: Job Position: Leading Scientific Worker Scientific Degree: candidate of physico-mathematical sciences e-mail: rykov@ifz.ru |
I agree with the proposals. There some
dissatisfaction with the present publication system, that limits discussions,
concerned with problems of renewal of our World organization conceptions. |
12 |
Erik S. Brown |
I read your postings on PhysicsForums
and made some replies. My feeling is the only way to begin a new
process of publishing is to have a few recognized web sites to publish and
archive new papers. Possibly, your site should index the 'most visited'
papers. Since the most important work would get referenced in new
papers, then we could assume that the most 'visited' papers would be a way to
'rank' papers that avoids the pier review problem. It will only be when
'important' publications are found on such websites (or blogs
as you suggest) that we would overcome the pier review problem of major
publications |
13 |
Merenkov Valeriy Genadievich Country: e-mail: wienc@list.ru |
The problem that you try to solve is really
important. Its detailed developmental work struck me. However, there are some
notes: 1. your following
phrase (at the text begining) just horrify: У Every
highly tailored scientific journal must have Е " Nobody donТt must to do
anything for us. Of course, the revolution is more effective then
co-existence, but revolutionary ideas rejected at the beginning. They studied
only later.а It is necessary to develop
anew project based on the co-existence of the present and new publication
system (if you really want to change anything, but not come to the assembly
of the martyrs of present science). аThe new system of accessible electronic
journals is need now (I think that it exist now). |
14 |
Polianskiy Vladimir Nikolaevich Country: Job Position: former plant engineer, a
pensioner now. e-mail: vlamir@nsk.ru |
Dear enterprising group, I am a former plant engineer. Now I am work
veteran. Thus, such as I have not any directа links to science now. However, I
work in polytronic physics now. You will know it if
you will visit my web site: There you are! Mr. Morozov
has pleased us with this electronic multi-subject magazine .IT IS
INVESTIGATED IN RUSSIA. http://www.catalysis.ru/chem/journal/new_jr.html I bring two quotations from, so-called,
"concept" of magazine: - Articles from authors should have the
recommendation of two doctors of the sciences, which are known as experts in
the given subjects. Permissive doctors cannot recommend within one-year more
than two articles. Doctors, recommending the given article, cannot be its
authors (or co-authors). Surnames of permissive doctors are specified in
magazine after the title of article, if they do not object to it. - Article will be published without the
recommendation, if among its co-authors there are members of the Although to twenty doctors you can address
for recommendations . they
will be silent, as guerrillas, if you are not a berry from their field. The
RAS is like a small party. And they have made this magazine for themselves . by a principle, that
wolves should be full, and lambs should be safe and sound. Look at the cover of magazine. It is smudged
with Bohr.s model of atoms with electrons rotating
around of a nucleus. The model for a long time has sunk into oblivion, but
they continue to pull the wool over reader's eyes. I would advise initiative
group to be afraid of such help especially. It is the example of direct
attack of "scientific" bureaucracy on your initiative. I at all do
not take into account new ideas. The censors for new ideas do not exist at
all, since anybody, except for the author, yet does not understand this idea.
I have in view of cases, when the author has convincingly shown a mistake in
an official paradigm, but scientific reviewers pretend,
that they do not see and do not hear it. For example, well-known carbon fullerens represent hollow balls. In all books their
sizes and amount of atoms in each ball are specified. Take the calculator and
calculate the density of carbon in fulleren. You
find out, that it in 4 times is more, than density of carbon in graphite, and
in 2.5 times it is more, than in diamond. Why all .known experts in the given
subjects. are silent? |
15 |
Parfenov Vladimir Alexandrovich Country: Job Position: junior scientific worker,
post-graduate student. e-mail: parfva@rambler.ru |
I believe that this problem takes place. My proposal is compromise between present
reality situation and this project. I support the idea of the creating of
public thematic Internet forums (that will discuss papers) at the sites of
journals. However, I am afraid, that a reader will be overwhelmed by the
information avalanche.а IТd like to
propose to send a submitted paper (with additional letter of credence,
containing the corresponding points of view of forum members) to the
publisher after 2-3 month discussion. It is necessary to force journal
reviewers to take into account these points of view during making their
(reviewer) decisions about paper publication or forced them to base any their
decision. Papers published at the journals maybe described as complete
scientific papers. Paper that was transferred (at the forums) at the folder
УacceptedФ must be described as thesis or report. |
16 |
Ivanov Valeriy Nikolaevich Country: Job Position: I was military officer. e-mail: man3@yandex.ru |
I support the basis of the project of
revision of the system of estimation and review of scientific papers and its
application in |
17 |
Kushelev Alexander Urievich Country: Job Position: The Chief of УNanoworldФ Laboratory Scientific Degree: No e-mail: nanoworld2003@yandex.ru |
Your project is actual.
I confronted with a barrier to publish scientific publications. I also
confronted with the absence of any reactions from the such
addresses where you sent you letters Е. IТd like to offer you to acquaint
yourself with УNanoworldФ encyclopedia and with the
process of the creation of microwave energetics and
aviation: http://nanoworld.narod.ru/ I have created pico-technology
at 1992: http://217.122.116.6/nanoworld/20041130/20050216/index4.html To presentа it (pico-technology)
to people I must pay 50000 |