[CPN] Results of vote on new Note 11.7.1
Kevin Padian kpadian at berkeley.eduThu Feb 21 19:00:13 EST 2013
- Previous message: [CPN] Results of vote on new Note 11.7.1
- Next message: [CPN] Next on the agenda: Art. 1.1 and the term "taxon" in the PhyloCode
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
I wholeheartedly agree with Michel. Thanks, Phil -- kp > Hi all, > > Personally, I am very happy that Phil is willing to continue to > lead these discussions. He does it well, and I sure don't have the time > to do it; my responsibilities keep piling up, and I will have to step > down from some committees, I think (I don't necessarily mean some in the > ISPN). So while I intend to continue serving the ISPN as best I can, I > sure cannot take more responsibilities now. > > Cheers, > > Michel > > On 21/02/13 19:53, Cantino, Philip wrote: >> In the absence of a flood of volunteers (or any, for that matter) to >> chair this committee, I am going to continue acting as the de facto >> chairman. If anyone is uncomfortable with this or with any aspect of >> how I am facilitating discussion and calling votes, please do say so. >> The last thing I want to do is be heavy handed in running the CPN, >> but I do want us to continue moving forward steadily. There is a >> backlog of issues to discuss and vote on. >> >> Although not everyone has voted on Note 11.7.1, the outcome is not in >> doubt, so I think we should move on. The vote is 9 in favor, 0 >> against, 1 declared abstention, and two members who did not respond to >> the call for a vote. The new Note will therefore be adopted. >> >> I will soon send the CPN the next items for consideration. >> >> Phil >> >> >> Begin forwarded message: >> >>> *From: *"Cantino, Philip" < cantino at ohio.edu <mailto: cantino at ohio.edu >> >>> *Date: *February 19, 2013 2:44:17 PM EST >>> *To: *Committee on Phylogenetic Nomenclature < cpn at listserv.ohio.edu >>> <mailto: cpn at listserv.ohio.edu >> >>> *Subject: **Fwd: Vote requested on proposed new Note 11.7.1* >>> >>> Dear CPN members, >>> >>> Nine of you have now voted (in some cases the vote was sent just to >>> me rather than to the listserv). We have not yet heard from Jacques, >>> Nico, and David Hillis. If you plan to vote, please do so by the end >>> of the day tomorrow so we can move on to other matters. Thank you. >>> >>> Phil >>> >>> >>> Begin forwarded message: >>> >>>> *From: *"Cantino, Philip" < cantino at ohio.edu <mailto: cantino at ohio.edu >> >>>> *Date: *February 18, 2013 11:12:35 AM EST >>>> *To: *Committee on Phylogenetic Nomenclature < cpn at listserv.ohio.edu >>>> <mailto: cpn at listserv.ohio.edu >> >>>> *Subject: **Fwd: Vote requested on proposed new Note 11.7.1* >>>> >>>> Only two CPN members have voted on this since Friday--five total so >>>> far. I hope the other seven of you will vote soon. There is >>>> another item of business from our discussions last year that I'd >>>> like to return to as soon as we complete this vote. >>>> >>>> Phil >>>> >>>> >>>> Begin forwarded message: >>>> >>>>> *From: *"Cantino, Philip" < cantino at ohio.edu >>>>> <mailto: cantino at ohio.edu >> >>>>> *Date: *February 15, 2013 11:08:31 AM EST >>>>> *To: *Committee on Phylogenetic Nomenclature < cpn at listserv.ohio.edu >>>>> <mailto: cpn at listserv.ohio.edu >> >>>>> *Subject: **Vote requested on proposed new Note 11.7.1* >>>>> >>>>> Dear CPN members, >>>>> >>>>> No one raised any concerns about the proposed new Note that I sent >>>>> you a week ago (it is attached again to this message). Michel and >>>>> David M. have already said that the proposal is fine with them. >>>>> Everyone else, please send your vote to approve or reject this new >>>>> Note. It would be helpful if you would vote by Monday. >>>>> >>>>> Thank you. >>>>> >>>>> Phil >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Begin forwarded message: >>>>> >>>>>> *From: *"Cantino, Philip" < cantino at ohio.edu >>>>>> <mailto: cantino at ohio.edu >> >>>>>> *Date: *February 8, 2013 2:48:09 PM EST >>>>>> *To: *Committee on Phylogenetic Nomenclature >>>>>> < cpn at listserv.ohio.edu <mailto: cpn at listserv.ohio.edu >> >>>>>> *Bcc: *"Cantino, Philip" < cantino at ohio.edu >>>>>> <mailto: cantino at ohio.edu >> >>>>>> *Subject: **proposed new Note 11.7.1* >>>>>> >>>>>> Dear CPN members, >>>>>> >>>>>> Although the chairmanship of this committee isn't settled yet, I >>>>>> will continue for now as de facto chairperson and send you the >>>>>> next item for discussion. I hope everyone--and particularly the >>>>>> three new members--had a chance to read the chronology I sent last >>>>>> Friday. No one contacted me with any questions, which I suppose >>>>>> is good news (though it could just mean that no one read it). >>>>>> >>>>>> At the end of the chronology was a list of three items the CPN >>>>>> still needs to consider before we are done with the revisions that >>>>>> were spurred by the CBM proposal regarding species. Here is the >>>>>> first of them. >>>>>> >>>>>> The addition of a new Note 11.7.1 was stimulated by a point made >>>>>> by David Marjanovic in January, when we were discussing the whole >>>>>> set of changes on Article 11. Bear in mind that the article this >>>>>> refers to is not Art. 11.7 on the current (online) version of the >>>>>> code (version 4c), but rather the new Art. 11.7 that the CPN >>>>>> approved on January 22. Both the newly approved Art. 11.7 and the >>>>>> proposed Note 11.7.1 are included in the attached document. >>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> Here is the relevant email exchange on the listserv concerning >>>>>> Article 11.7, and ending with a suggestion that a new note is >>>>>> needed: >>>>>> >>>>>> Marjanovic: These proposals are probably good enough in practice. >>>>>> The only possible exception is in the proposed Art. 11.7: whether >>>>>> a specimen "cannot be referred to a named species" will sometimes, >>>>>> perhaps often, depend on the species criteria. What do you all >>>>>> think? >>>>>> >>>>>> Cantino: When faced with the situation David describes, many >>>>>> (perhaps most) systematists who wanted to name a clade with the >>>>>> new specimen as a specifier would either assign it to the >>>>>> previously named species or name a new species with that specimen >>>>>> as a type. In either case, the type would be used as a specifier. >>>>>> If the researcher thinks the specimen does not belong to any >>>>>> previously described species but there is some reason not to >>>>>> describe a new species based on it, then this is one of the >>>>>> situations where it would be acceptable to use a non-type as a >>>>>> specifier. In other words, the rule is working appropriately in >>>>>> this situation. >>>>>> >>>>>> Marjanovic: So it's up to the author of the clade name, and their >>>>>> decision can't be challenged later on the grounds that the >>>>>> specifier is deemed (by the challenger) to belong to a named >>>>>> species? If so, that's fine, but it should be spelled out in a note. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >>>>>> Let's give ourselves a week to think about this. If you have >>>>>> comments, please send them to the listserv < cpn at listserv.ohio.edu >>>>>> <mailto: cpn at listserv.ohio.edu >>. If there is no discussion, I'll >>>>>> call for a vote next Friday (unless someone else agrees to chair >>>>>> the CPN, in which case the timing of the discussion and vote will >>>>>> pass to him or her). >>>>>> >>>>>> Phil >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >> >> >>
>> CPN mailing list >> CPN at listserv.ohio.edu >> http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn > > > -- > UMR 7207 > Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle > Batiment de Géologie > Case postale 48 > 43 rue Buffon > F-75231 Paris cedex 05 > FRANCE > http://www2.mnhn.fr/hdt203/info/laurin.php > >
> CPN mailing list > CPN at listserv.ohio.edu > http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn > -- Kevin Padian Department of Integrative Biology & Museum of Paleontology University of California, Berkeley CA 94720-3140 510-642-7434 http://www.ucmp.berkeley.edu/people/padian/home.php
- Previous message: [CPN] Results of vote on new Note 11.7.1
- Next message: [CPN] Next on the agenda: Art. 1.1 and the term "taxon" in the PhyloCode
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
More information about the CPN mailing list