Re: Thanks [For response on Johns Hopkins Thesis Availability Thread"

[Holloway3@aol.com]

Mr.  Farber:

As someone noted previously, your posts are often not very clear on the points
that you are trying to make.  Communication is a two way street, and if you
want to be understood, you have some responsibility to write clearly.  When
asked a question for clarification, it is not enough to say, as you have, "re-
read the previous post".  Let me give an example.  This is what you posted
today:

>>>>>>4) In Oct. 1998 when I asked the school of Public Health at Hopkins how
to
obtain a copy of Yeh's June, 1997 thesis, I was told completed Ph.D. thesis
are not made available to "outsiders".

5) I pointed out in my post of Feb. 1 to RADSAFE that 4) above was false,
since I was able to obtain the Yeh, 1997 thesis from UMI Dissertation Service,
a private company, in Michigan.<<<<<<
-------
Well, I looked backed to see what you posted on February 1 and this is what I
found:

>>>>As noted, the Hopkins Dept of Public Health [Oct. 1998]  told me in
response to my direct request about getting the Yeh thesis, that it was not
available to "outsiders" until after publication of any results in a journal.
Clearly false. A thesis submitted for a Ph.D. is a public document and Hopkins
knew it. They were trying to limit public awarements of the findings.<<<<<

Your post today (5) is easily understood and is more complete than your
previous cryptic comment.  Someone reading your post of February 1, just
above, might easily be confused about what was "clearly false".  Was the
thesis not available, or was it available and they claimed it was not?  Or was
the work not yet complete?  It has been clear that you were accusing Johns
Hopkins of not being open and above board with the results of the work, but
exactly how they were doing that has remained somewhat muddled.  Personally, I
think you have a weak case in that regard because the publications are going
forward and the thesis is available.  If it is a case of suppression of
information, they certainly are not doing a good job of limiting its spread.
Incidentally your two word phrase "clearly false" is a fragment of a sentence
and that is why it is not clear.  If you want convey your views to the largest
audience, you cannot assume that you write perfectly and that there is no need
of clarification,  because it is abundantly clear that you do not write
perfectly.  Still, I do not mean to be overly critical, because I think many
on the list do find your comments interesting.  
 
                                   R. Holloway
                                   holloway3@aol.com



************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html