X-Message-Number: 32446
From: David Stodolsky <>
Subject: Re: D Stodolsky's Replies to Me
Date: Wed, 3 Mar 2010 19:02:50 +0100
References: <>

On 3 Mar 2010, at 11:00 AM, CryoNet wrote:

> In addition, the Evaluators should be identified and their record of
> message disposition choices should also be available to all CryoNet
> subscribers in order to insure their continued impartiality.  
> Cooperative
> group activities always work amicably and without suspicion when there
> is total openness concerning all related actions

Unfortunately, if you are evaluating your boss publicly your judgement  
may no longer be impartial and if it is, you may be looking for a new  
job. That is why anonymous peer review is the gold standard of  
scientific publishing.


> Unfortunately, Social Preferencing with respect to the personal
> characteristics of other individuals, even more than with respect to
> goods and services, requires the possibility of evaluating the
> evaluator, and therefore cannot be fully effective until anonymity
> ceases and total openness of one's personal life and characteristics  
> is
> embraced

This is erroneous. I explain in a number of peer-reviewed publications  
how both the protection of anonymity and evaluation of evaluators is  
possible with a secure pseudonym system.


dss

David Stodolsky
  Skype: davidstodolsky

Rate This Message: http://www.cryonet.org/cgi-bin/rate.cgi?msg=32446