Public voting is still enabled. Maybe all 3 of us can get a boost from this. I do not recall: did your essay highlight the MFMP effort?
On Fri, Jun 27, 2014 at 11:47 PM, Peter Gluck <[email protected]> wrote: > Unfortunately all the 3 pro-cold fusion FQXI essays (by Jed, Kevin and me) > have been down-voted by the community of participants- a Pareto issue (80% > honest, 20 % dishonest) and did not made it to the pool of 40 (from 153) of > potential winners. > As regarding MFMP they represent a great initiative and a noble alternative > of how research is made, however for development the Montecuccoli stuff > decides. Our young colleagues have received only 4.6% of the funding they > need. > > Peter > > > On Sat, Jun 28, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Kevin O'Malley <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I figure this was worth some self-promotion at the FQXI essay contest. >> After all, how many other essay contestants were seeking to highlight an >> organization that got nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize DURING THE >> CONTEST? >> >> >> *Author Kevin O\'Malley* wrote on Jun. 28, 2014 @ 06:17 GMT >> stub <http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/enstub/103563> >> Humanity would be steered properly by taking notice of this development. >> No one else can claim that the organization they were seeking to highlight >> in this essay contest was IN THE SAME TIME FRAME highlighted by the Nobel >> Peace Prize process. >> >> r <http://fqxi.org/community/forum/post/report/103354> >> > > > > -- > Dr. Peter Gluck > Cluj, Romania > http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com >
