[FOM] FOM reviews

[Torkel Franzen]

Harvey Friedman says:

  >What do you think are the most important items to review on the FOM?

  As you emphasize, the essential difference between a FOM review and
a journal review lies in the interactive nature of the medium. While
your reviews will no doubt be of interest in themselves, what would
really help "make the FOM email list the mandatory place of record for
important issues in f.o.m. and f.o.m. related topics" would be for the
authors of the books or papers under review to enter into an
interactive clarification and elaboration of their argument or point
of view. Thus I would say that the most important items to review on
the list are those for which this condition holds, in addition to the
work being thought important or noteworthy by knowledgeable people in
the field. Unfortunately, we don't know which authors are prepared to
enter into such a discussion on the list, so I don't think we have
sufficient information to answer your question. Experience strongly
suggests that few authors are prepared to enter into any sustained
interactive discussion of their work (Reuben Hersh, to his great
credit, did so).

---
Torkel Franzen