> Quoting email is a bit of a cop out. Encourage colleagues to refer you to
> peer reviewed papers. Usually one uses the weak and suspect "personal
> communication (pers.comm.)" together with the name. It plays no role
> whether it was a snail-mail letter or email. Most academics (for what they
> are worth) consider email citations as solid as the paper the source is
> written on. That doesn't mean you shouldn't do it, it just means most
> won't care.
Although Darren may have decided to leave the thread I became aware of
it just today and want to support the academic institution requests for
I believe that the request depends greatly on the institution. When I
was in the final phases of diss completion at Temple University in 1996
I was asked for my electronic resources. By this they meant that they
wanted WWW sources (for the latest information) and email (from well
recognized persons within the field). They felt that a diss on
multimedia in dance could not be current without them. I really hope
that this is not an Americas vs. the world question. What's the harm in
each institution addressing a case by case situation. Some situations
may be well supported through electronic forms, while others may rely
too heavily upon them.
Also, thank you Lisa for mentioning the NDA listserve.