Reader Comments
Post a new comment on this article
Post Your Discussion Comment
Please follow our guidelines for comments and review our competing interests policy. Comments that do not conform to our guidelines will be promptly removed and the user account disabled. The following must be avoided:
- Remarks that could be interpreted as allegations of misconduct
- Unsupported assertions or statements
- Inflammatory or insulting language
Thank You!
Thank you for taking the time to flag this posting; we review flagged postings on a regular basis.
closePerhaps more traditional
Posted by cpikas on 30 Jan 2010 at 14:28 GMT
traditional methods
http://ploscompbiol.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1000563#article1.body1.sec1.p1
One might argue that conferences pre-date journal articles and that they are more traditional. Certainly they are not new nor is their importance to science new
RE: Perhaps more traditional
AllysonLister replied to cpikas on 04 Mar 2010 at 09:10 GMT
Thanks for your comment, and I appreciate the distinction you are making. It is true that conferences have been around for a long time. It would perhaps be more appropriate to have said "Conferences are important hubs of scientific communication, facilitating networking in ways that *other* traditional methods of remote information dissemination cannot match." We were aiming to highlight the importance of conferences in terms of communication and information dissemination, and we did not mean to imply that conferences are new.