JAY JG (jayjg@hotmail.com) [050125 04:23]:
From: "Tony Sidaway" minorityreport@bluebottle.com
JAY JG said:
The fact that only a tiny number of seconday sources seem to even be candidates for this kind of treatment is interesting.
*All* secondary sources must be handled with caution.
Handled with caution is fine, specific ones singled out for special treatment is not.
Bjorn's handling of it may have been clumsy (and that username raises an eyebrow), but I think the essential point he was trying to make still stands.
(Also, you both seem to be assuming less than complete good faith on the part of the other. I really don't see that as eing the case for either of you. I see no reason this can't be worked out in a mutually satisfactory manner now and for the future.)
I see no reason why each of the thousands of secondary references shouldn't have attention paid to them in principle. We have a reference checking project, after all.
- d.