[Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Thread Index] | [Date Prev] | [Date Next] | [Date Index] |
On Tue, 30 Jan 1996, Stefan Bengtson wrote: [snip] > Why would any publisher bother > with going through a lot of expense to put the same thing on record at some > later stage, where few people will ever bother to look at it (even less pay > for it)? Why? Because serious researchers *want* the confidence-inspiring rigor of peer-reviewed, edited information. They *will* look at it, and pay for it. That is not to say there is no place for quick dissemination of these same results. Those same people need to keep up with what is going on in science. It's the difference between the daily newspaper and an encyclopedia yearbook.
Partial index: