Archiver > GEN-MEDIEVAL > 2002-04 > 1020231461

From: "Stewart, Peter" <>
Subject: RE: Off-Topic Reply to RE: On Douglas Richardson's new books
Date: Wed, 1 May 2002 15:37:41 +1000

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [mailto:]
> Sent: Wednesday, 1 May 2002 14:50
> To:
> Subject: Re: Off-Topic Reply to RE: On Douglas Richardson's new books
> In a message dated 4/30/02 4:14:08 PM, writes:
> << Roz, authors who publish in the likes of TAG, TG, VG or
> NEHGR are not paid for their articles ... AND the editors of those
> articles would not accept them without PROPER and
> THOROUGH credit to whomever credit is due. Those journals
> have a scholarly reputation to maintain. >>
> And this is good? On the contrary, it creates a great bit of envy
> when one is not paid for one's efforts -- envy and rancor against
> those who are able to make a profit ... and that envy is sorely
> visible on this forum. As to the editor/publishers -- they own the
> show and the profit is theirs. it is a sorry state when scholarship is
> equated with monetary hardship.

I don't understand this. The implication in the quote from Paul Reed is that
some good inheres in maintaining the scholarly reputation of journals by
ensuring that due credit is always given by contributors - in my reading
this doesn't refer back beyond his "AND" to the fact that contributors are
unpaid, nor does that necessarily "equate" with "monetary hardship" in the
first place.

Are you suggesting that money saved in printing costs by not crediting
Douglas Richardson's sources can make everybody rich?

Peter Stewart

This thread: