Openness and its limits (was: Re: [jox] Mission statement)
- From: Stefan Merten <smerten oekonux.de>
- Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 20:27:00 +0200
Hi Mathieu and all!
Last week (7 days ago) Mathieu O'Neil wrote:
Hi StefanMn and all-
* Other people:
Do we invite others to join in this list and in the journal process if we
think they would be interested?
May be we can do it like it is typical in peer production: Based on a
growing or grown trust we invite people to an editorial board. This
mailing list can be open for subscriptions, however. It should be
archived on the web in any case - transparency is crucial.
M: There is one academic researcher who I think would be highly suitable
based on interests and competencies. But here we come up against the
openness issue. I feel a bit uncomfortable writing this person's name here
before having approached the person formally as there is a chance that the
person might find this message before the approach was made...
I agree that this can be a problem. When I'm considering about whether
a certain person could be asked to do a certain job I ask by private
mail sometimes before making this public. This has also the advantage
that there is no pressure put on the respective person not to say "no"
because of publicity. I think this is part of the discretion of a
In some cases such as these or delicate reviews private lists may be
necessary so as not to inhibit frank discussion... openness may be
counter-productive in some instances. Difficult...???
Well, others seem to prefer an open style which I agree with.
Personally I think if people know that everything is public then they
lower their tone anyway (not considering trolls who do the
opposite...). And I think we are able to express our discomfort based
on content reasons without hurting the feelings of persons who created
After all we are in the nice situation that we do not need to convince
someone with a too differing opinion. We can just reject a