Aaron Morris [I think, therefore I bee] wrote (19:18, 4/9/98):
 
>There are MANY more comments that have been made, both on list and to
>me privately [about moderating the BEE-L list].  I simply have not had
>time to >respond to them all.  I hope that those who wrote to me privately
>will find >their queries answered in this public forum.  I hope that those
>who voiced >concerns are reassured that this will continue to be a PUBLIC,
>OPEN forum, and
>I hope that my belief that moderation will improve the caliber of this
>list proves to be correct.
 
   Let me first offer a tremendous vote of thanks to Aaron for the
incredible service he provides us all!!!  Running a list such as BEE-L is
truly a labor of love.
 
   When I first joined a few e-mail networks, I too was concerned that I
would encounter the same type of censorship that we encountered for the
last three decades from bee researchers.  (Of course, I am sure that those
anonymous referees successfully rationalized to themselves why they were
not really engaging in censorship.)  For an example of what I mean, one
need only read Excursus EXC (pages 274-284) in our 1990 Columbia University
Press book, ANATOMY OF A CONTROVERSY.  (It is no wonder that Tom Seeley
concluded, in his so-called "review" of that book in NATURE (paraphrased)
"Do not read this book!")
 
   (Anyone interested can request a copy of that excursus.  Be sure,
though, to contact me privately on e-mail:   [log in to unmask] and
not over the net.)
 
   Several years have now passed since I first subscribed to BEE-L, and I
can't express how very pleased I am with what has transpired.  In no
instance have I recognized the slightest hint that censorship (in the evil
sense) has occurred.  Aaron's example of the crusty comments of Andy
Nachbauer provide an excellent example.
 
   A real question emerges:  Are scientists ready for democracy?  Up until
now, a great many of them have lived in a very comfortable world that has
permitted exclusion (through the mechanism of an at times rather insidious
anonymous review system) results and conclusions that more powerful figures
in the field disagree with.  That is, grant support and favorable review of
research results can be denied readily by those who wish to keep dogma in
place.
 
   The e-mail networks throw a wrench into that former comfortable
existence.  Hundreds of people now have instantaneous access to results and
conclusions that do not fit into the mainstream current of prevailing
thought.
 
   To date, I have not seen the slightest indication that anything I have
posted (though at times admittedly quite controversial) have encountered
any of the extreme censorship that I have encountered during the last three
decades.  That speaks very well for moderators of the lists to which I
subscribe.
 
   Again, I salute Aaron and the other moderators of these lists.  Long may
democracy prevail!
 
                                                        Adrian
 
 
 
Adrian M. Wenner                         (805) 893-2838 (UCSB office)
Ecol., Evol., & Marine Biology           (805) 893-8062  (UCSB FAX)
Univ. of Calif., Santa Barbara           (805) 963-8508 (home office & FAX)
Santa Barbara, CA  93106
 
***********************************************************************
*  "...scientists are paradoxically resistant to change, even when    *
*  confronted with evidence that virtually demands change of them."   *
*                                                                     *
*                                 Barber, 1960 (in Greenberg, 1983)   *
***********************************************************************