> A potential problem arises in the present case of "possible outburst > of QW Ser" suggested (privately) by Patrick Schmeer. If there is no > additional observation, should he register his possible postive observation, > or should he withdraw it because there is no confirmation? Though I suppose > the latter approach might be more frequently taken, this could introduce > additional bias. My preference is the first approach, to report all > observations as they were preceived. Some possible positive sightings > may turn out to be spurious, and other negative observations may turn > out to be simple chance non-detection of true outbursts, but are > statistically less biased than those observations suffering from retrograde > selections. > > Regards, > Taichi Kato > OK, maybe I am a "positive" observer, but may false detections occur that often?? I wouldn't report something that I'm not sure I have seen. Even taking this approach I know some time I can make a mistake, but here it looks like a spurious detection is an every day thing. I totally agree with Taichi and Lew: I think all observations made should be all observations reported. If I decide not to report soemething, then I should swallow my desire of being recognized as the discoverer. I mean: if I wasn't sure it is like I didn't see it. If I was sure enough, I reported it and that's all. I note Patrick continue to follow his private messages policy. Patrick: Noone is going to crucify you if you make a mistake. Make all of your announcements publicly and this discussion will be coming to an (end?). You look like your mind is set about it, in spite of the current situation. I would really like to enjoy of your reports as I do with Mike's or Maciej's. Cheers, Sebastian. --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://vsnet.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.249 / Virus Database: 122 - Release Date: 13/04/01