I leave it to others to reply further to Joseph Ransdell if they wish; to me it seems he is debating irrelevant points of ideology and interpretation, rather than points of susbtance and practice. He thinks self-archiving papers in the Ginsparg Archives is primary publication. Fine, let him call it what he wishes, as long as authrs actually go ahead and do it, rather than taking such interpretations as a further basis for Zeno's Paralysis. But his misinterpretation of the CALL to self-archive-so-as-to-free-the-literature -- rather than the self-archiving itself -- as the actual freeing of the literature [1] seems so off-the-mark that one can only think it willful.
Stevan Harnad
