Re: What excuse next for no pay

[BERNARD L COHEN <blc+@PITT.EDU>]

	My reward offer was for a "Letter-to-the-Editor of Health Physics

or an equivalent journal".I know that this was stated explicitly more than

once on RADSAFE and the reason for that stipulation was explained -- a

Letter-to-the-Editor gives me a chance to respond in the same issue. That

stimulates discussion of my work, which is the reason for my offer. With a

paper like Puskin's, my response will not appear until about a year later,

which is not a very effective discussion.

	I explained this on RADSAFE more than once. There have been

several exchanges about my offers on RADSAFE over the last few years, and

I may not have explained these matters fully in every exchange, so you can

pick a quote from these many discussions where I do not give the full

explanation.

	My offer still stands, as originally given and reviewed above.



Bernard L. Cohen

Physics Dept.

University of Pittsburgh

Pittsburgh, PA 15260

Tel: (412)624-9245

Fax: (412)624-9163

e-mail: blc@pitt.edu





On Fri, 25 Apr 2003, Carl Miller wrote:



> Dr. Cohen,

>

> I did not ask if you responded to Dr. Puskin since that is not required according to your reward offer below. I asked if you paid the money to Dr. Puskin for having a suggested cause of your findings published in the Health Phsysics Journal. It is very telling that you failed to answer such a direct question.  You continue to offer permutations of rewards, but it is now painfully obvious that you never intended to honor your offer.

>

> You guranteed to pay anyone who had any suggestion (with no qualifications) PUBLISHED.

>

> Then you said you would only pay if it was published in the Health Physics Journal.

>

> OK, that has now been done. I look forward to hearing what excuse will be given now.  After all, you were the one who stated,

>

> http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/0201/msg00422.html

>

> "In all of the reward offers I made for explanations of my data, there was no requirement that the explanation be proven to be correct. On the contrary, it was up to me to prove that it cannot be correct. If I could not prove it to be very highly implausible in the view of neutral observers, the reward would be paid. Now I have even dropped my option for proving that it is not correct -- if the suggested explanation gets ACCEPTED FOR PUBLICATION (you don't say where), the reward is paid whether or not I can prove that it is incorrect."

>

>

> --

> __________________________________________________________

> Sign-up for your own FREE Personalized E-mail at Mail.com

> http://www.mail.com/?sr=signup

>

>



************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/