Message 00178 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: joxT00000 Message: 127/176 L36 [In date index] [In thread index]
[First in Thread] [Last in Thread] [Date Next] [Date Prev]
[Next in Thread] [Prev in Thread] [Next Thread] [Prev Thread]

[jox] Updating papers (was: Multi-rating mode of evaluation / Updating papers)

Hi Mathieu, Biella and all!

Last week (11 days ago) Mathieu O'Neil wrote:
ps. Another important issue was raised by Brian (see below) which we
had discussed previously on this list: whether authors can update
their papers after receiving reader feedback.

The first question to me is: Is this really necessary. StefanMz once
created the OpenTheory_ project with exactly that idea. IMHO it became
clear that this is not the way how thoughts expressed in texts undergo
evolution. This is different from Free Software.

.. _OpenTheory:

Last week (11 days ago) Gabriella Coleman wrote:
I was also wondering if the peer reviewers will touch base with each 
other about their reader reports before sending them to the 
editor/author and using that conversation as an opportunity to reassess 
the reports. I have always found one of the strange things about reviews 
is how you can get a glowing review, a lukewarm one, and finally one 
that is downright nasty. A conversation between reviewers might be a 
good way to push against some of the shortcomings of an individual 
reviewing social science/humanities texts where there is a great deal of 
judgment along the axis of personal taste that goes into assessing the 
strength of an essay.

Well, recently I just was part of a very open review process for an
(technical) conference presentation. The reviews were open to everyone
though I think this has been hardly used. The official reviewers had
some concerns about the abstract which after a couple of itertions
lead to a totally different presentation. That was a very good
experience to me :-) .

Anyway I thought that reviewing an article is not a one-way process.
What we can do is to give reviews / hints to the author giving the
author the chance to improve the article. Once such a process is
finished - and it is finished at some point - the article can be

I'd do this at least in an semi-open process. For instance we can use
the website for reviews and make the review process visible only to
the author (and journal officials of course). That would also be a
useful to publish later if we decide on publishing the review process.

Last week (10 days ago) Mathieu O'Neil wrote:
in any case I'm not even
sure if the CMS can be set up to allows authors to access texts
directly, or whether we would want that to happen, or how it would
work - give them access rights over one paper, for a limited period
of time? 

Please don't worry too much about the capabilities of the website.
Plone is very powerful - especially to deal with problems like this.



Thread: joxT00000 Message: 127/176 L36 [In date index] [In thread index]
Message 00178 [Homepage] [Navigation]