Fwd: Urgent response requested: Nov. 9 deadline for serving as co-author of "Open Paper" version of the testing and piloting "Open Letter"

8 views
Skip to first unread message

Ron Baiman

unread,
4:29 PM (4 hours ago) 4:29 PM
to geoengineering, Michael MacCracken, Alan Gadian, Ron Baiman
Dear Geoengineering Google Group Colleagues,

This testing and piloting paper: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1L3WaiDAAy0hExj_wjFrt4K5jZe7x7r5U/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=116465941111195452408&rtpof=true&sd=true is an expanded response to reviewer concerns about the testing and piloting open letter disseminated earlier in the year 
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1cNMzlI2tyv8n4JkUSQiAnrWPgQ1C-lTI/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=116465941111195452408&rtpof=true&sd=true 
did not provide sufficient elaboration and documentation to support its contentions. 

We believe this open paper draft provides the additional clarification and documentation the Open Letter reviewers requested, but we know we can still improve the draft.  For example, as a "fresh" reviewer, you may have good suggestions for cutting the abstract to 250 words and better describing the paper's main points.  

As you may know, (Seigert et al. 2025), with its 42 co-authors that served as the instigation for this open letter, now has 16 citations and 141,000 views.  We therefore believe this paper should have a similarly large number of co-authors (up to 42, if possible). We would therefore greatly appreciate it if you would carefully review the testing and piloting paper, suggest edits, and/or let us know whether you agree it is sufficiently sound for you to serve as a co-author on writing, validation, visualization, etc.  As time is of the essence and we want to submit this as soon as possible, please respond within two weeks, by Nov. 9, if you wish to serve as a co-author, possibly subject to minor (as we really need to move this along!) suggested edits you'd like us to consider.    

Note that, as is the case for Seigert et al. 2025 (see author attribution list copied below), if this testing and piloting paper is published, the end of our paper (as for all OOCC papers) will include a note on "author contributions" that clarifies that not all Co-Authors make the same contribution to the paper;  for example, many can be "validating" authors.  

In short, we would like to move you from the "potential" co-author list to the actual "co-author" list. Please let us know by Nov. 9, whether this is acceptable, as we aim to submit this revised testing-and-piloting open letter promptly. 

Thank you. 

Best,
Ron, Mike and Alan

"Author contributions

Writing – original draft: MSi, HS, MJB, JB-G, HB, SB, MC, SLC, FC, RMD, HAF, EG, SMG, AMG, SH, KRH, SFH, RH, KAH, DK, JDK, BK, RDL, AM, VM-D, FSM, HM, RM, TAM, TN, CN, BO, PP, JoR, JaR, SS, AS, MSo, LAS, CRS, JS, MT.

Writing – review & editing: MSi, HS, MJB, JB-G, HB, SB, MC, SLC, FC,RMD, HAF, EG, SMG, AMG, SH, KRH, SFH, RH, KAH, DK, JDK, BK, RDL, AM, VM-D, FSM, HM, RM, TAM, TN, CN, BO, PP, JoR, JaR, SS, AS, MSo, LAS, CRS, JS, MT.

Conceptualization: MSi, HS.

Funding acquisition: MSi.

Investigation: MSi, HS, MJB, JB-G, HB, SB, MC, SLC, FC,RMD, HAF, EG, SMG, AMG, SH, KRH, SFH, RH, KAH, DK, JDK, BK, RDL, AM, VM-D, FSM, HM, RM, TAM, TN, CN, BO, PP, JoR, JaR, SS, AS, MSo, LAS, CRS, JS, MT.

Project administration: MSi.

Validation: MSi, HS, MJB, JB-G, HB, SB, MC, SLC, FC,RMD, HAF, EG, SMG, AMG, SH, KRH, SFH, RH, KAH, DK, JDK, BK, RDL, AM, VM-D, FSM, HM, RM, TAM, TN, CN, BO, PP, JoR, JaR, SS, AS, MSo, LAS, CRS, JS, MT."

Visualization: MJB, MSi."



--


--

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages