[Zoobank-list] Registration and quality control, plus a concern

[Richard Pyle]

> > Why is this not already a problem? The taxonomic "thief" can already
easily
> > self-publish new names at any time, in compliance with the current Code.
>
> But he could not gain senior synonymy or the like over the competing
proposal
> unless he sees the latter prior to its publication, which under the
current
> system normally he does not. This is where wide-open review prior to
approval
> of registration and availability would make a significant difference.

The scenario Frank proposes (registered+published = available) I *think*
would conceal the unpublished registration entry from public view until
after it is published, and would therefore not, by itself, increase the risk
of thievery over what is currently possible (correct me if I'm wrong,
Frank). The "registered=available" scenario eliminates the problem
altogether.

So none of the three proposed scenarios of registration really pose any
greater risk than the current situation.

Rich