Harry Veeder <[email protected]> wrote: The background to this story is that Mitchell lSwartz does not approve of > Jed Rothwell and Ed Storms content policy for the LENR library. >
He may have said that, but we do not have a content policy. > They have said they prefer to include papers in the library which > will raise the credibitily and respectability of the field ( and I > don't just mean they prefer nicely formated papers without > spelling mistakes). We have uploaded papers attacking the field, by leading skeptics such as Steve Jones. So that can't be true. Here is his paper: http://lenr-canr.org/acrobat/JonesSEchasingano.pdf We have also uploaded a large number of papers that I personally think have no scientific merit. They range from really bad to nonsense. And no, I will not say which ones I think are garbage. The readers can decide. I am not a gatekeeper. By the way, if there is a spelling mistake, I correct it. > Based on my reading of Swartz anything that smacks of > pandering makes his stomach turn so he views the policy as > politically motivated censorship. > It might smack of pandering if there was any truth to it, but anyone looking at the papers in the library can see it is nonsense. - Jed
