After reading the slew of emails that landed in my inbox over the last couple of days I'll put my hat on as CPD chair and put my head above the parapet.... (hopefully not to be shot at)
The IUCr (and others) have tried to get journals to use powder cifs and checkcif for structures for some time with limited success. The powder CIF is less than ideal we know but it does work (with some frustrations). This doesn't stop lousy data being used in papers for other purposes but we have to trust to the admittedly imperfect peer review process to weed out the worst offenders. Education in powder diffraction (or the lack of) is an ongoing problem but resources do exist if you search for them. I believe I mentioned these in the past but no harm repeating the point.... The CPD webpage has a number, including the Erice school content which covers alot of advanced material and the Canadian Powder Diffraction workshop which has more basic material. http://www.iucr.org/resources/commissions/powder-diffraction/schools The Rietveld refinement guidelines are an oft-ignored resource which is now open-source so no excuse not to read them (and hopefully heed their recommendations) http://dx.doi.org/10.1107/S0021889898009856 Pam ________________________________________ From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on behalf of Lubomir Smrcok [[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2015 3:25 PM To: Kurt Leinenweber Cc: [email protected] Subject: RE: Apologies... The "No Attachment" rule. Hi Rievelders, Although I have gone in the past years a long away from daily "rietvelding", from time to time I can't resist my temptation to comment on some posts (OK, if the cap fits ... :-) and some of the comments could be well called snarky. But if you read that someone i) in facts asks people to solve his problem ASAP, or ii) a beginner without knowledge of elementary crystallography tries to refine ADP of a cubic special position, because a SW permits and complains about matrix problems, or iii) someone attempts quantitative standardless phase analysis of mixtures of disordered minerals whose structures are at maximum just estimated ... etc., etc.. All right, you may accuse me of going too far, or of exaggerating but isn't it at least half true ? If it is a PhD student I always ask where's his/her supervisor ? We could also ask the companies who claim that perfect (and I simply must add here : though physically or statistically impossible - not to speak of common sense ... ) results can be easily achieved when their SW is applied. Should we tell them or better not as are we afraid ( I am not, I do not apply :-) of loosing their sponsorships ? Best, Lubo On Sun, 10 May 2015, Kurt Leinenweber wrote: > > Hi, > > > > The subject of snarky comments is a fascinating one. I have definitely been > the recipient of snarky comments for some of my more stupid posts on this > list. The good thing about them is that it lets you know that you are > saying or doing something, crystallographically speaking, that is really > unpalatable to someone out there, and you might need to know this for your > own good. I have definitely been chastised and have learned some things > over the years by being forced to read a snarky response to one of my > posts. But on the other hand, to a beginner a snarky comment can be > damaging. However, these comments are not confined to mailing lists ? they > happen at conferences too and they are just part of the fabric of science. > As long as the whole list does not descend into a chaos of snarky comments, > I think it?s OK to let them get through. One possible remedy is for others > to come to the defence of a victim of excessive snarkiness. I have seen > that happen on this list sometimes, and other times have been tempted myself > to intervene, though I usually have not been brave enough (especially when > the snark source is someone famous). > > > > - Kurt > > > > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf > Of Darren Broom > Sent: Sunday, May 10, 2015 3:36 AM > To: Alan Hewat; Leopoldo Suescun > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: RE: Apologies... The "No Attachment" rule. > > > > Hi Alan > > Thanks for the explanation. The point about the archive seems to me to be > the most persuasive - I see what you mean. Providing the file sharing links > stay active that does ensure the archive remains useful without having to > "host" additional files on the archive server. > > It does seem that removing any attachments automatically would be the best > solution. Hopefully Song Zhen's suggestion will help sort that out. > > Incidentally, Jon nicely illustrated one of the things about the list that I > really appreciate, by posting an interesting link that I hadn't seen before > and probably wouldn't have come across otherwise. > > Also, I wondered if you could set up SYMPA so that it strips emails of any > unnecessary snarkiness (above a predefined threshold)? > > Best regards, > > Darren > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > Sent: Sat, 9 May 2015 11:39:46 +0200 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Apologies... The "No Attachment" rule. > > Dear Rietveld list. > > > > Good to see so many people asking for the list to be continued. And > even an example of an interesting scientific question immediately > answered by an expert. Encouraging. > > > > So why do I forbid "sinful" attachments ? (No, it's not because I'm > getting old and snarky, though we all do eventually :-) Think of the > Rietveld list as a kind of relaxed "Twitter", except that you are not > limited to 140 characters. And what about Google's decision this month > to favour sites that can be used on a mobile phone ? Yes, even oldies > use mobile phones for email. SMS is another example of beauty in > brevity. > > > > Then the Rietveld Archive is an excellent record of past discussions - > without the attachments. Messages that rely on attachments are then > often incomprehensible - look up that message on > https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Frankly, if you need > more than that, put it on a webserver with a link to it. Such links > are preserved in the archive. > > > > If you see my own warning about "no attachments" as an attachment :-) > perhaps you should check how your email client is set up. Or tell me > how I can do it differently with SYMPA www.sympa.org I didn't design > the mail server nor the mail archive. Clearly, it is difficult to > enforce a simple "no attachments" rule, so what would it be like > policing a "small attachments" rule ? Even if you personally have lots > of space for email, our webserver (for which we don't pay) would still > have to distribute ~1500 copies of your "small attachment". > > > > In this particular case, a figure from an unpublished paper was > published and criticised out of context. Is that really fair? If it's > from a referee's copy we shouldn't even refer to it, let alone publish > it. If it's a pre-print, just publish a link to it. But there are > already plenty of examples in the published literature if you are > looking for evidence of regression. > > > > So where are the "Apologies"? There are none :-) "Excuse me" is what > people say when they elbow their way through a crowd. (I only do that > when I really need to). So if you really need to attach a document, go > ahead. After all, you can still read the list on the archive. > > > > Alan > > ______________________________________________ > > Dr Alan Hewat, NeutronOptics, Grenoble, FRANCE > > <[email protected]> +33.476.98.41.68 > http://www.NeutronOptics.com/hewat > ______________________________________________ > > >
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Please do NOT attach files to the whole list <[email protected]> Send commands to <[email protected]> eg: HELP as the subject with no body text The Rietveld_L list archive is on http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
