Message 00179 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: joxT00171 Message: 2/2 L1 [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]

Criterion for non-academics for scientific committee (was: Re: [jox] Reviewer for 'pschological' papers)



Hi Mathieu!

BTW: I think the mail you sent to Ricky which he replies to here
really has never been sent to the list.

Last week (7 days ago) Ricky Herlitz wrote:
On 2009-11-22 Mathieu O'Neil wrote:
------
[...]
a) there is no clear consensus about membership criteria yet and
b) I'm not sure that it's part of my "job description" to perfom such
searches to verify whether someone is qualified or not,
I did not pursue this.

One idea good be that we do an interview with potential SC members.
The interview would ask about "their achievements and thoughts about
the subject in which they are claiming expert status". If the
interview - or may be a real conversation - is convincing for the
Governance Board then the person is included. That would rely less on
official academic opinions and more on what we have in mind.


						Grüße

						Stefan
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal



Thread: joxT00171 Message: 2/2 L1 [In date index] [In thread index]
Message 00179 [Homepage] [Navigation]