3 ms·

> Email addresses are not created/maintained for life Then don't pretend that it is an email address. I mean, it's true that email addresses are not guarantee

> Email addresses are not created/maintained for life Then don't pretend that it is an email address. I mean, it's true that email addresses are not guaranteed to be assigned for life, but putting a fake email address on a paper is misleading.

chipdart 2y ago
> Then don't pretend that it is an email address. I think you don't know what a email address is, and how they are used. > (...) but putting a fake email address(...) This nonsense of "fake email address" was only brought up as a baseless accusation. There is zero substance to it, and it's been used as a red herring in this discussion. Focus on the problem: do you expect any and all email addresses you publish somewhere years ago to continue to work?
- qwertox 2y ago
  > [...] you won’t let me claim some of my preprints, because there’s no match with the email address. Which there can’t be, as we’re only listing a generic first.last@org addresses in the papers. I understood it this way: org is not handing out first.last@org to the employee, but using an email format in order to clarify that "first last" is working at org and collaborated on the paper not in private, but as an employee. He might have last.f@org gotten assigned as a valid email address from the org, but that one is not being used on the paper, while first.last@org is invalid. > I think you don't know what a email address is, and how they are used. You should know that this kind of comment should not be made on HN, see the guidelines [0] ("Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes."). > do you expect any and all email addresses you publish somewhere years ago to continue to work? No. But that is irrelevant to this conversation. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Sophira 2y ago
Let's say that John Smith at XYZ Corp has authored a paper. The company obviously wants recognition and so they use their corporate email address "jsmith@xyz.com". John has since moved on and is earning more at ABC Corp instead. XYZ Corp has duly reclaimed John's old email address, and John cannot receive emails at said address any longer. This is the situation the OP is in. It was never a "fake email address". They did not literally type "first.last@org", that was an example suitable for using in their comment. [edit: I'm actually wrong with that last statement, as it turns out. While it wasn't a fake email address, the situation is slightly more nuanced in that OP actually did say "{first}.{last}@hhi.fraunhofer.de" in the paper, as there were multiple authors who all had the same email address format - see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41479618 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41479618. I still think this is a valid method, though, and it's certainly not fake. Besides, the problem I outlined sounds like it probably remains an issue even if it's not the exact problem OP is experiencing.]
- qwertox 2y ago
  Ok, so they used a template on the paper, namely "{first}.{last}@hhi.fraunhofer.de", while the email addresses, if the names are applied to the template, do in fact yield valid email addresses. It sounded as if they were using "john.doe@hhi.fraunhofer.de" while in reality it was an invalid email address ("because there’s no match with the email address"), that he would have tried to claim co-authorship via his "real" address, which might be something like "j.doe2@hhi.fraunhofer.de" (but luckily is not). It's all clear now. Thank you for your explanation.
  - Y_Y 2y ago
    This is what I was asking about and I thank you and GP for clarifying the situation. There also send to be an unnecessary flamewar about the impermanence of email addresses generally, that's an unfortunate accident.

chipdart 2y ago

> Then don't pretend that it is an email address. I think you don't know what a email address is, and how they are used. > (...) but putting a fake email address(...) This nonsense of "fake email address" was only brought up as a baseless accusation. There is zero substance to it, and it's been used as a red herring in this discussion. Focus on the problem: do you expect any and all email addresses you publish somewhere years ago to continue to work?

qwertox 2y ago
> [...] you won’t let me claim some of my preprints, because there’s no match with the email address. Which there can’t be, as we’re only listing a generic first.last@org addresses in the papers. I understood it this way: org is not handing out first.last@org to the employee, but using an email format in order to clarify that "first last" is working at org and collaborated on the paper not in private, but as an employee. He might have last.f@org gotten assigned as a valid email address from the org, but that one is not being used on the paper, while first.last@org is invalid. > I think you don't know what a email address is, and how they are used. You should know that this kind of comment should not be made on HN, see the guidelines [0] ("Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes."). > do you expect any and all email addresses you publish somewhere years ago to continue to work? No. But that is irrelevant to this conversation. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Sophira 2y ago

Let's say that John Smith at XYZ Corp has authored a paper. The company obviously wants recognition and so they use their corporate email address "jsmith@xyz.com". John has since moved on and is earning more at ABC Corp instead. XYZ Corp has duly reclaimed John's old email address, and John cannot receive emails at said address any longer. This is the situation the OP is in. It was never a "fake email address". They did not literally type "first.last@org", that was an example suitable for using in their comment. [edit: I'm actually wrong with that last statement, as it turns out. While it wasn't a fake email address, the situation is slightly more nuanced in that OP actually did say "{first}.{last}@hhi.fraunhofer.de" in the paper, as there were multiple authors who all had the same email address format - see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41479618 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41479618. I still think this is a valid method, though, and it's certainly not fake. Besides, the problem I outlined sounds like it probably remains an issue even if it's not the exact problem OP is experiencing.]

qwertox 2y ago
Ok, so they used a template on the paper, namely "{first}.{last}@hhi.fraunhofer.de", while the email addresses, if the names are applied to the template, do in fact yield valid email addresses. It sounded as if they were using "john.doe@hhi.fraunhofer.de" while in reality it was an invalid email address ("because there’s no match with the email address"), that he would have tried to claim co-authorship via his "real" address, which might be something like "j.doe2@hhi.fraunhofer.de" (but luckily is not). It's all clear now. Thank you for your explanation.
- Y_Y 2y ago
  This is what I was asking about and I thank you and GP for clarifying the situation. There also send to be an unnecessary flamewar about the impermanence of email addresses generally, that's an unfortunate accident.