Message 00263 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: joxT00189 Message: 26/77 L6 [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]

Re: [jox] Cutting the Knot

Hi Mathieu and all!

5 days ago Mathieu ONeil wrote:
From: Stefan Merten <smerten>
Date: Thursday, March 11, 2010 5:39 pm
2 weeks (17 days) ago Mathieu ONeil wrote:
StefanMn then proposed a choice where authors submitting a 
proposal could
indicate whether they want a binary model (publish or reject) 
or a
multi-dimensional rating system:

2-proposed solution

There are two main problems with his proposal. First, I think 
we should be
as consistent as possible in what we present to the world. It would
be weird to have some papers with an appreciation and others 
Agreed. My proposal was a compromise and I agree with you.

Well OK, but in your other email you seemed to be agreeing with Toni who was agreeing with you that there should be two options. It can't be both. This is a real either/or, we have to decide about this...!???

Sorry for the confusion. Because of a minor technical problem my first
mail - the one you just replied to - did not go out at first and I
needed to resend it later. My second mail on that day replied to Toni
and only when I wrote this second mail I saw his points. Please check
the `Date:` headers in my mails.

Do we have signaled as well as unsignaled papers??

Frankly I'm undecided in this point. IMHO both positions have valid
points. At the same time I think it is not mission critical. What do
others think?

May be what could help a decision is to think about on how to "sell"
the choice variant to the general public? As I see it is a result from
an internal discussion which may not be transparent for the general
public. If we find a good explanation this might call for a decision
in favor of a choice option.

It's true that having one (restricted) mailing list where all 
submissions> are discussed could be messy (though less so if 
people do not
interfere with titles of emails thereby breaking threads).

Which BTW today seems be wishful thinking to me ;-) .

And it
might be easier to create files that can be used later on in the
website when publishing, I don't know. At the same time I see some
problems with setting up discrete pages for articles: a) 
authors and
reviewers might in fact benefit from reading discussions on other

True. But this can be resolved with permissions.
OK - for example, anyone who is an author or reviewer could access all the reviews and discussions for example?

Yes. Plone has a role concept built in and you can put a user into one
or more roles. This way you need to give access permissions for a role
once and everyone with this role has access then.



Thread: joxT00189 Message: 26/77 L6 [In date index] [In thread index]
Message 00263 [Homepage] [Navigation]