[Converted from multipart/alternative]
[1 text/plain]
well i think eventually, why doesnt it become totally open in
the end,
people that have a problem with it can apply to other journals,
why not just
do the open experiment and get on with it?
just a thought there to free our hands and proceed......
athina
On Tue, Aug 25, 2009 at 6:16 PM, graham
<graham theseamans.net> wrote:
Stefan Merten wrote:
4 days ago graham wrote:
So the review processes seem to split into two: academic
style, and
informal non-transparent 'an editor does it'. I haven't
found anyone
deliberately doing a transparent version.
So how about we be the ones to do it, but as an experiment?
I fully agree but why as an experiment? Couldn't this be
just our
policy?
The big downside to this is it's likely to involve double
the work for
us :-(
Why do you think so?
If we accept my compromise of having peer reviewed +
'experimental' then
we have to define protocols for two methods, not one. So
double the work
to set it up initially.
Graham
Grüße
Stefan
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal
--
Dr Athina Karatzogianni
Lecturer in Media, Culture and Society
The Dean's Representative (Chinese Partnerships)
Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
The University of Hull
United Kingdom
HU6 7RX
T: ++44 (0) 1482 46 5790
F: ++44 (0) 1482 466107
http://www.hull.ac.uk/humanities/media_studies/staff/athina_karatzogianni/
Check out Athina's new research:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Power-Resistance-Conflict-Contemporary-
World/dp/0415452988
[2 text/html]
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal