Research

[ariel]

There were several "research" papers published here. Some were incredibly sophomoric and some had logical and factual holes size of Great Lakes.
I wrote comments, pointing out to these gross deficiencies and trying to be as polite as possible.
I was sternly reprimanded for discouraging the novices from posting their ideas and for pointing out their errors.
Since then I am trying to keep very low profile.

If this Forum wants academic discussions, then it should adopt the " no holds barred" approach.
Being a current Assoc . Editor of 2 major scientific Journals, as well as Assoc Editor or Editorial Board member of a dozen more in the past I can assure you that the level of criticism in the real academic world is several orders of magnitude more severe than here, and that any self-respecting scientific journal rejects at least 80% of submissions.

The Forum has to choose between being an academic resource and a mutual admiration society.

[David R]

Once upon a time, there was no internet, no collectors forums, no Google and no Wikipedia. Now there are!
I have been collecting for 49 years, starting with some absolute rubbish and working my way up to desirable and well researched rubbish. Research was done in Libraries and Museums and pumping the more knowledgeable I met in the shops and at the Fairs. Dear God how I bent the ears of those poor dealers and other collectors!
Rejoice in the vast resource we now have, and have sympathy for those who now enter the Maelstrom of collecting, for just as there is more information easily available, so are there more opportunities to come a cropper, Ebay and Alibaba you know who you are......
I could not collect the way I do now without the internet, I also use it to research beyond my comfort zone, and elsewhere I happily share what I have learned with others. The medium has changed, but it is still the same hobby. Pay it forward.

[Kubur]

I think all has been said. I would like to add that the research's world is not an ideal world. Most of the researchers are not looking to improve knowledge. Most of them are very confortable with little ideas and little projects. Most of them are reproducing knowledge, very few are doing real research. The ones who are doing real research are fighting against windmills.
Best,
Kubur

[Ian]

Ariel, I am reminded of a quote attributed to Henry Kissinger. When asked, "Why do academics fight so viciously?" he is reported to have responded, "Because there is so little at stake."

As academics, we are trained by our mentors to attack without mercy (in the name of objective criticism) and to defend at all costs. After battling the wild rapids of academic discourse, it is sometimes difficult to adjust to a quiet backwater like this forum. Here we are more often dealing with civilians than combatants, and need to adjust accordingly. There are ways of pointing out errors in logic, assumptions, biases, etc. that are not perceived as "hostile." After all, there is so little at stake here too. We can have spirited and lively debate here, and often do, and I see no reason why discussions based on academic principles cannot be conducted here--just in a more gentle and polite manner than in the academic sphere.

Ian.

Originally Posted by ariel

There were several "research" papers published here. Some were incredibly sophomoric and some had logical and factual holes size of Great Lakes.
I wrote comments, pointing out to these gross deficiencies and trying to be as polite as possible.
I was sternly reprimanded for discouraging the novices from posting their ideas and for pointing out their errors.
Since then I am trying to keep very low profile.

If this Forum wants academic discussions, then it should adopt the " no holds barred" approach.
Being a current Assoc . Editor of 2 major scientific Journals, as well as Assoc Editor or Editorial Board member of a dozen more in the past I can assure you that the level of criticism in the real academic world is several orders of magnitude more severe than here, and that any self-respecting scientific journal rejects at least 80% of submissions.

The Forum has to choose between being an academic resource and a mutual admiration society.

[Silver John]

Originally Posted by ariel

There were several "research" papers published here. Some were incredibly sophomoric and some had logical and factual holes size of Great Lakes.

There is evidently a huge difference between accumulating information for our own personal interest and conducting legitimate research.

Can anyone recommend a text that lays out the correct way to record and assess historical information and evidence? It would be a shame to spend years looking into a particular subject only to find that nothing one has uncovered is given credence by other collectors and researchers.