[jox] Consensus? 02 (ratings)
- From: "Mathieu O'Neil" <mathieu.oneil anu.edu.au>
- Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 11:27:54 +0100
Hi all
Re ratings, I don't think anyone has suggested a response to the
following criticism: publishing differently-expert rated papers /
submissions may cause some prejudice to, or hurt the feelings of, the people
who were given inferior ratings. This is the same system as Slashdot
and other blogs where people rate the comments and the posts of
contributors. It seems a bit more brutal if reviewers publicly name
certain papers in the journal as inferior to others.
So maybe we could have expert ratings but they would not be made public: we would publish more
papers, presumably, than if we published only highly excellent papers. We may
lose some "credibility points" (but we don't really have any at this
stage). But we won't be publicly discriminating between published
papers. Not sure how useful they would be then.
It's either that, or do away with expert ratings altogether, and go back to publish / don't publish. At any rate those are the two alternatives I can think of...
cheers,
Mathieu
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal