13-04-2020, 07:48 PM
@elieD — and all of you researchers who work partially or wholly outside of mainstream academe — I say that publishing work in non-traditional media is nothing to be ashamed of per se. A good idea, well presented and amply supported, will eventually get the attention it deserves, by its remarkable resistance to damning criticism, and its practical utility for people who apply it. Not nearly all people with good original ideas are fortunate enough to have a ready audience among experts and academics, at least until their idea gains some popular traction. And conversely, not nearly all people fortunate enough to have a ready audience among experts and academics have good original ideas.
I'm an idealist beyond redemption, and the Promethian increase in the accessibility of scholarship by websites like Stack Exchange and arXiv makes me happy. Kind of like how making video was made popularly accessible by YouTube and the falling price of cameras and information storage. On the one hand, a lot of this non-mainstream scholarship is low quality, and is destined to sit on the Internet not getting clicks. But there are diamonds in the rough. And any technology that makes a good idea more likely to be heard is all in all a good thing.
I'll be having a look at your paper this evening elie, and I'll let you know what I think.
I'm an idealist beyond redemption, and the Promethian increase in the accessibility of scholarship by websites like Stack Exchange and arXiv makes me happy. Kind of like how making video was made popularly accessible by YouTube and the falling price of cameras and information storage. On the one hand, a lot of this non-mainstream scholarship is low quality, and is destined to sit on the Internet not getting clicks. But there are diamonds in the rough. And any technology that makes a good idea more likely to be heard is all in all a good thing.
I'll be having a look at your paper this evening elie, and I'll let you know what I think.