From: Self To: "Tracz, Will" Subject: Phantom authors Date: Tue, 22 Sep 1998 15:49:48 GMT+1 I am writing to you in your position editor-in-chief of Software Engineering Notes. In the May 1998 issue there are two papers that concern me. One is the "Towards a tradition of Software Engineering", which I find excellent, the other is "A middle-out concept of hierarchy", which is a trifle wierd but thought-provoking. I am concerned because the authors are anonymous without this being obvious in the newsletter. I surfed the net a bit to find Puppydog and Raccoon. I had at first thought these might be Native American authors, since the snail mail addresses are in New Mexico. But the home pages of the two are so obviously jokes that I feel slightly offended. I have corresponded per email with Raccoon, so there is a person that eventually answers the letters to the email address, but the answer I obtained is not satisfactory. "I have had to think about this response for several days. I conclude that I have no answer for you. For MANY reasons, I believe it is most accurate to say that L. B. S. Raccoon writes papers. No joke. Identity is a very complex subject. At the very least it involves issues of psychology, loyalty, philosphy, and culture. Unfortunately, this is not the direction of my work for now, so I will not go into it. - L. B. S. Raccoon" I note that all of the publications of Raccoon are in SEN, which leads me to believe that either you are Raccoon, or you know who Raccoon is. A serious scientific newsletter should have credible, reachable authors. I might want to discuss the topics raised further with the authors, or I might even want to invite them to a conference! If the article should be wrong in some respect, I also want to know who is responsible. Sure, it's easy to hide behind such a pseudonym, but there need to be very, very good reasons for this and they need to be made explicit. The author should be given as A. Nonymous and a footnote should explain that, for example, the author is concerned that his or her employers would not look kindly on the opinions expressed in the article. Of course, this is a sad state for a so-called democracy if people fear being fired for telling the truth. What is scientific endeavor more than the search for truth? How can I discuss the integrity of scientific work with my students (and discuss the otherwise excellent paper by Raccoon) or suggest that SEN is a serious periodical when games such as this are played - and have been for quite some time, from the look of Raccoon's publication list? Could it be that all of the other articles are by "fake" authors as well? Who are Zheng, Rajanna, Xiaocong, Stiglic, to just name some that I have picked out at random? I have never heard of them. Do I have to check them out with a credible source, that is, a source that is not SEN, before I cite anything that they have written? Of course, this does give me to ponder if perhaps words can stand on their own. Isn't what is said more important than who is saying it? After much deliberation I have to say that an author should have the courage to stand by his or her convictions and sign a publication (which is a public statement). If a great new method for squaring circles is found, it does indeed make a difference if the publication is by Prof. Dr. Esteemed, who has a reputation at stake, or by J.Student Hacker, who might be a tad quick to jump to conclusions. I do hope that you have some good answers for my questions, I think that this discussion should be made public in SEN. Sincerely, Debora Weber-Wulff ----- Debora Weber-Wulff (on sabbatical at) MALMOE HOEGSKOLA Teknik och ekonomi Tel: 040-325628 Email: Debora.Weber_Wulff@te.mah.se Adress: 205 06 Malmoe. Besoeksadress: Stora Varvsgatan 11 H Hemsida: http://www.te.mah.se/person/dw/