Perhaps it would help if more people contact Editor and President and Science committee re this issue.
Chuck Chapman
-----Original Message-----
From: Rodney Barton rbartontx@yahoo.com [iris-species] <iris-species@yahoogroups.com>
To: iris-species <iris-species@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tue, Aug 30, 2016 7:12 am
Subject: Re: [iris-species] Re:Article refused publication in AIS Bulletin
I contacted Jim Morris re: this article and he said it was still under review. He didn't seem open to me having a look at it.
R
----------------------------------------------------------
From: "Kenneth Walker kenww@astound.net [iris-species]" <iris-species@yahoogroups.com>
To: iris-species@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2016 5:32 PM
Subject: Re: [iris-species] Re:Article refused publication in AIS Bulletin
I also hope the author submits the article to SIGNA. SIGNA may not have the reach of the AIS Bulletin, but is a great place for controversy concerning species classification!
Ken Walker
Concord, CA USA
On 8/29/2016 2:32 PM, Chuck Chapman irischapman@aim.com [iris-species] wrote:
I should calcify. Technical advisors disagreed with each other. Not all advisors disagreed with article.
Chuck Chapman
-----Original Message-----
From: Chuck Chapman irischapman@aim.com [iris-species] <iris-species@yahoogroups.com>
To: iris-species <iris-species@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, Aug 29, 2016 5:30 pm
Subject: [iris-species] Re:Article refused publication in AIS Bulletin
If you look in editors comments in new bulletin there is comment that an article on species classification of iris that was not published as the 'technical' advisors disagreed.
I sent in an objection about a week ago and a follow up yesterday. So far no response.
I hope author submits to SIGNA and that it gets published.
Strange to have such a response in Bulletin. Controversy and disagreements based on science always advances science.
Chuck Chapman
