[Clascomment] Comment on 'Comment on the narrow baryon peak reported by Amaryan et al.' by Volker Burkert et al.

[burkert]

Curtis,
I fully understand your feelings, and I agree with you that Matt 
deserves a lot of credit for his extensive work on this analysis, and I 
wish there had been another way of giving him direct credit for this 
work. On the other hand, I was arguing that referring to an analysis 
that was not reviewed to the degree that I felt was necessary for a 
paper that we want to use as a citation reference. I felt, that putting 
an explicit reference to this CLAS note would have made us vulnerable to 
criticism even from within our own collaboration.  I felt that was too 
risky.

By the way, I did give Matt a lot of credit in 2007 and 2008 when he 
asked me for letters of recommendation for new positions, including the 
one he now holds. So, I think he may not have had a disadvantage from 
his service work for the collaboration.  At least I tried to do my part.

Cheers,
Volker



       On the other
n 11/11/11 4:00 PM, Curtis Meyer wrote:
> I have read through the resulting paper and feel that it does a good job in
> laying out the facts. I am a little surprised that even though the extensive
> work of Matt Bellis is referred to as 'other analyses', there is no explicit
> reference to this in this paper. I know how much work Matt put into that
> analysis, and feel that the time spent preventing an incorrect conclusion from
> being published slowed down his own work in getting his analyses published. It
> is a shame that this sacrifice on Matt's part cannot be directly acknowledged in
> this comment.
>
>     Curtis