On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 5:18 AM, Krishnamurthy, Ramesh <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:r.krishnamurthy@aston.ac.uk">r.krishnamurthy@aston.ac.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br>







<p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:#1F497D">Hi Laurence</span></p>
<p>>> I certainly hope that no conference/journal starts 
publishing lists of papers that they rejected! Wouldn't it be a complete
 breach of privacy and
</p>
<p>>> could also be lead to all kinds of problems for other conferences/journals that accepted the papers?</p>
<p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:#1F497D">1. I don’t see how we 
can have “openness” AND “privacy”… Perhaps Olympic non-medallists should
 be offered the same privacy, or losing football teams, or
 unsuccessful candidates in political elections? </span></p>
<p><span style="font-size:12.0pt;color:#1F497D">2. Instead of 
“rejected”, let us say “not accepted” - which would cover ‘inappropriate
 target audience’, ‘not enough room in this particular 
conference/journal
 issue’, ‘too similar to another accepted contribution’ etc, etc. 
Therefore, I don’t see any problems in another confere</span><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">nce/journal accepting the same paper?</span></p><p>Following your argument for 1), do you also suggest publishing lists of people who were unsuccessful in job interviews at your institution? You could also start publishing lists of people who applied to your university but were unsuccessful. You could also publish lists of faculty who applied for promotion but were unsuccessful.</p>

<p>Isn't the danger of such a practice completely obvious?</p><p>Laurence.<br></p><span style="color:#1F497D"></span>