I have another question. Does the paper have to be available on the internet? Do we link to it? Does anyone care as long as we have the reference and the information?

Do copies of the charts and such constitute 'fair use'?

Thanks (I've had too much permissions training in the last few weeks)

For those who are entering, and indeed for anybody else who wants to help get this really well attended, a little forum-wide advertising might be useful, so I made a little banner. if you wish to use it, simply copy the following code into your signature box:

Code: Select all

[url=http://www.rationalskepticism.org/announces/1st-monthly-rs-science-writing-award-t3005.html][img]http://i139.photobucket.com/albums/q301/hackenslash_album/RatSkepSciwriting-1.jpg[/img][/url]

OgreMkV wrote:I have another question. Does the paper have to be available on the internet? Do we link to it? Does anyone care as long as we have the reference and the information?

A link would be preferable, but if there is no online version then that's not really a problem as long as you include a reference. (You could PM me the reference for your article though and I'll try to help you search). It's good to link it if you can find it online, or at least a link to the abstract, so people can access it if they want to without having to search the net themselves.

OgreMkV wrote:Do copies of the charts and such constitute 'fair use'?

Thanks (I've had too much permissions training in the last few weeks)

Yep, as far as I know charts, figures, etc should all be fine as long as you make a note under it saying "Graph taken from Cooper (1980)" or whatever.

I have nothing important to do today. So I might pop something in. If anyone has any article in mind (anything at all), I would be happy to try and make it accessible to the general audience. Or I'll pick up a 'Nature' article at random.

So, tell us. What would topic would you like to see for the next competition?

Mazille wrote:So, tell us. What would topic would you like to see for the next competition?

Big boobies.

In all seriousness, though, how about the old "The future of science: an empirical study of innovative and cutting edge technology or advancement"?

Mazille wrote:So, tell us. What would topic would you like to see for the next competition?

I like Oliver's idea of speculating about what the science of the 21st century will look like. But what about "Earth - our home" ? I still have an unpublished contribution waiting.

palindnilap wrote:

Mazille wrote:So, tell us. What would topic would you like to see for the next competition?

I like Oliver's idea of speculating about what the science of the 21st century will look like. But what about "Earth - our home" ? I still have an unpublished contribution waiting.

Actually, that could possibly be a topic in a few months. I don't think it's a good idea to rehash that topic right now, though.

Oliver's idea does sound pretty cool.

It would be great if we have Oliver's topic. Could we just make it the bi-monthly Science writing comp? There would be more entries and more time to vote, I think.

We'll think about that. Gotta go now, have some young, impressionable students to meddle with.

Mazille wrote:We'll think about that. Gotta go now, have some young, impressionable students to meddle with.

You know that most universities have rules against that right?...

Mr.Samsa wrote:

Mazille wrote:We'll think about that. Gotta go now, have some young, impressionable students to meddle with.

You know that most universities have rules against that right?...

Not physically, man.

Is it time for a second monthly science writing competition yet?

It's already underway, T. (See my sig.) It's just that nobody submitted anything yet.

Slow, aren't I?

We're used to it.

OK then:

I think it's best to start the next one relatively early and just have a longer submission phase like Latimeria suggested in the Discussion thread.
Anyone want to chime in on possible topics?

I had an idea for a topic. Very similar to a previous topic that was quite popular, but with a slightly different approach:

Simplify a difficult scientific principle for the layman.

Quite probably the most difficult to cover, but should produce some interesting results. Feynman is alleged to have once said 'if you can't explain it to a freshman student, you don't understand it'.

Just to add to the brainstorming here, the topic that received the second most support last round was:

"Highlighting the work of a scientist who performed work of great importance that was largely overlooked by their own contemporaries"

It didn't win last time, but that alone isn't reason enough to dispense with it.

Results from topic poll prior to the last round.

That's a good one <L>, but it does kind of rely on a pretty keen interest in the history of science. I was thinking of something less.. erm... overtly sciencey. Something that might give us non-sciencey rationalists a bit of an in.

Science And Me
It has been said that the products of scientific endeavour since the enlightenment form the social and physical architecture of our modern civilisation. It is undoubtedly true that science has had a profound and significant impact in many areas of life, but which aspect of science do you consider to have a particular impact on, or relevance to, your everyday life?

Perhaps a little too broad, but I'm sure you get the sort of thing I'm thinking of; something that doesn't necessarily require specific knowledge in a specific area but which nonetheless can encompass a specific and/or a general knowledge of sciencey stuffs. However, being specifically sciencey might be kind of the point of the competition, so whatevers...

Just a thought...



edit: damn these lumpen fingers.