: I wrote a paper and sent it to a journal which said it did formal peer : review, and as Southwest Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics was a : legitimate journal, there was no reason to doubt them.
I'm under the impression that the ex-SJPAM's peer review method involved feeding a copy to the rats out back and publishing if it didn't kill them.
: Well someone posted about that on sci.math and the sci.math'ers were : FURIOUS.
No, no I don't recall that. Concerned that a journal might publish a paper with mistakes in it, yes.
: Then some of them decided they'd get together and email them, a group : of people saying they'd all email, telling them my paper was false and : that they had proven it on Usenet.
No, I don't believe any group got together. What *was* done was that the journal was told that there was an error in a paper they had published.
Any competent responsible mathematician should contact any journal if he or she sees an error in a published piece.
: The chief editor apparently believed them, and yanked my paper