Thomas G. Lammers
lammers at FMPPR.FMNH.ORG
Wed Apr 2 06:24:00 CST 1997
At 09:41 AM 04-01-97 -0700, richard a fagerlund wrote:
>I am not sure if everyone in reading through Josephs posting. Most of
>the responses I have seen are either critical or plain vitriolic. One
>person whose name I forget (I deleted his message) went so far as to call
>Josephs colleague names, "nomenclatural court jester" and something else.
>If there was anything else in his message of importance it was overshadowed
>by his demonstration of his own lack of character.
It was I who called the anonymous trouble maker a "nomenclatural court
jester", as well as a "mischievious harlequin", and, by implication, a
"loophole lawyer", and I stand by my characterization of this person. To
my mind, these are not terribly vitriolic terms, but an accurate description
of the unknown perpetrator's attitudes, as revealed by Joe L. The entire
tone, as presented by Joe ( in particular her consideration of other popular
venues for publication of the new name) cannot be interpreted as anything
but the work of a merry prankster, someone who revels in scooping up our own
foibles and playfully flinging them our faces. As presented in Joe's
posts, this person comes across as someone having a good laugh at our
expense. Contributing to this impression is the desire to take such cheap
shots at botanical nomenclature while hhiding behind the mask of anonymity.
I take extreme exception to having my character questioned. I, at least,
am willing to step up to the microphone and state my name when I my voice my
opinions, and not dance about in the background unseen, afraid to take
responsibility for my own actions.
>I believe Joseph is trying to convey a message that the code needs revising.
>It is true his example may be a little on the extreme side, but at least
>he notified everyone in the world about it with the idea someone will
>start the process of fixing the system. How many other "taxonomists" are
>there right now in both zoology and botany that have in the past or are
>contemplating in the future of publishing something in some obscure
>little journal that no one will ever see. At least Joseph has made his
>material available for everyone to see if they want.
>I think the community would be better served if they looked at the
>positive side of Josephs posting instead of the "petty squabbling" initiated
>by petty people. Joseph is not being a "loophole lawyer", he is pointing
>out loopholes that are being used now and should be closed.
If this was truly offered in an earnest attempt to highlight problems with
the Code, it is a flawed example. The Code is perfectly clear. It is NOT
effectively published, based on ICBN Art. 30.3 and Pre.10. Period.
Exclamation point. End of sentence.
Thomas G. Lammers
Department of Botany Classification, Nomenclature,
Field Museum of Natural History Phylogeny and Biogeography
Roosevelt Road at Lake Shore Drive of the Campanulaceae
Chicago, Illinois 60605-2496 USA
e-mail: lammers at fmppr.fmnh.org
voice mail: 312-922-9410 ext. 317
"... library science is the foundation of all sciences ... we will survive
or founder depending on how well the librarians do their jobs."
-- Robert A. Heinlein
More information about the Taxacom