[Taxacom] why Martin Fikacek resign

Stephen Thorpe stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Fri Oct 9 16:11:06 CDT 2015

And determining exactly what constitutes as "exceptional need" is wherein difficulty lies, thus proving my original point!


On Fri, 9/10/15, Laurent Raty <l.raty at skynet.be> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Taxacom] why Martin Fikacek resign
 To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 Received: Friday, 9 October, 2015, 6:46 PM
 On 10/08/2015 10:41 PM, Michael A. Ivie wrote:
 > Still, all these diversions aside, Stephen has never
 backed up his libel
 > of the Code saying it was difficult to designate a
 Neotype. That is
 > proven incorrect.  I am sure no one cares
  From the excerpts you provided, the validity is not
 assessable. That 
 the name "is involved in taxonomic confusion" does not
 amount to "there is an exceptional need". Note also that,
 although it is 
 required that you stated the existence of an exceptional
 need, and that 
 you explain it, this is not enough. The need must really
 *be* there, and 
 must really *be* exceptional.
 If I disagree with your opinion on this point, I can reject
 designation as invalid.
 Was the name in use, or threatening another name?
 Laurent -
 Taxacom Mailing List
 Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
 Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.

More information about the Taxacom mailing list