Message 00586 [Homepage] [Navigation]
Thread: joxT00565 Message: 35/38 L12 [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] Debrief and clarification process

[Converted from multipart/alternative]

[1 text/plain]
hi all,

stefan wrote:

Yesterday Toni Prug wrote:
i think this is critical point and deserves more attention and arguments.


I think openness in all stages is crucial for this project. I thought
this would be clear...

i think maybe transparency is the word you're looking for. let's not forget
that we are removing certain capacities from authors and reviewers (such as
the privacy of reviews and the ability of authors to keep draft material
invisible) in order to make submission/review processes visible. toni has
already pointed out that making these visible will reveal the work of
reviewers and make their influence on the final piece known. it also
encourages reviewers to do a better job and maybe draft submissions will be
a bit better as well. both of these are good things.

what i think is a more difficult question is whether this making visible can
and should be forced. is CSPP 'open' because it's process can be observed by
all or is it 'open' because contributors and reviewers (specifically) have
more options in regards to the visibility of their work from submission to
publication? in other words, isn't their a tension in forcing people to make
themselves visible in the name of openness?

it is also worth considering how to spread the visibility. that is, maybe we
want to force reviews to be public because of the long history of issues
with the review process and because doing so in some ways corrects the
traditional power imbalance. but maybe we don't want to force authors to
publish drafts. perhaps there aren't many compelling reasons to not force
them, but i think there are legitimate situations where there might be, such
as a person writing in a second language or a grad student.

i'm not saying i'm definitely against publishing drafts, but i don't think
it's as straight forward a decision as its taken. i would personally rather
strongly encourage it, but not force it as a condition for publication.



[2 text/html]

Thread: joxT00565 Message: 35/38 L12 [In date index] [In thread index]
Message 00586 [Homepage] [Navigation]