[Zoobank-list] "the real challenge"

[Spies, Martin]

Frank Krell had written:

>>We do not need and nobody can afford to take over from the 
>>journals the proper publication of 20,000 names per year. 
>>Moreover, people like the choice, where to send their papers.
>>
Richard Pyle replied:

>I agree completely -- and I think the this should continue as it has.  And it would, in Scenario 2. It's just that the availability of new names would depend only on them being properly registered -- not also on them being secondarily published in paper-based form outside of the registration process.
>
If availability were tied to (fast) registration only, uncoupled from 
(much slower) publication, what would be the safeguard prior to 
publication against misapplication (intentional or unintentional) of the 
available but insufficiently defined name? Yes, comparisons of misnamed 
material with the type(s) designated along with registration would 
clarify the taxonomy, but a system improving on what we have now ought 
best to preclude the necessity for (potentially lots of) such comparisons.

>The real challenge will be to get the basic "mandatory registration" step accepted and adopted by the broader taxonomic community in the first place -- a challenge that all 3 scenarios face equally. As was pointed out earlier today on this list by John Noyes and Johan Liljeblad, the problem isn't active resistance to registration, but rather passive indifference.
>  
>
I agree, but what good, then - if you'll forgive a newcomer to the list 
such an heretic question - is back-and-forth repetition of arguments 
about details way beyond "the real challenge" you're naming?

Sorry, folks, but I don't find the results of my first day on this list 
particularly productive or attractive, what with, for example, about a 
dozen messages copying the thread title I had introduced, but only one 
of them actually dealing with elements of my initial message.

The majority consensus on this list seems to be to work ourselves into 
the new paradigm slowly and cautiously, allowing sufficient time with 
each step for the community at large to be convinced by new advantages, 
if the latter prove to materialize and outweigh any possible new 
disadvantages. I agree with this approach, as evidenced by my itemized 
summary copied to this list by Frank Krell yesterday. In this context, I 
still would be interested in a discussion of my proposal (possibly also 
voiced by somebody before me?) of an additional registration requirement 
for new names as soon as possible, plus a gradual quality control 
process for registration of previously established names. I sincerely 
believe that this scenario would best meet "the real challenge", because 
it would require the community to adapt to a relatively minimal change, 
and a change the advantages of which should be the easiest to demonstrate.

Regards,

-- 
Martin Spies
c/o Zoologische Staatssammlung Muenchen
Germany

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://list.afriherp.org/pipermail/zoobank-list/attachments/20051007/99ed9a34/attachment.html