[jox] Plone (was: Hull Meeting)
- From: Mathieu ONeil <mathieu.oneil anu.edu.au>
- Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2010 13:31:48 +0200
[Converted from multipart/alternative]
[1 text/plain]
Hi George, all
This seems like a good opportunity to re-address the question of the CMS.
@Toni Prug: you may have missed a previous message I sent in which amongst other things StefanMn and I were wondering about how the parallel peer review projects you are involved in were progressing? We were thinking that if good progress was being made elsewhere there seemed little point in us "re-inventing the wheel" and that it might be possible for us to use any insights and architectures for our project? Thanks for advising.
@StefanMn: we should in any case prepare for the worst-case scenario (i.e., no immediate help from other projects) and set up a system to start moving. Two options: public or private. I have three submission proposals (one by me and two by others) that could be made publicly, on this list. If however we want to use George's texts, or as a general principle want to be private, we need to set up a private list or a private part of the site. Are any of these options feasible? Just to be clear this is not to set up something permanently, just a solution for now so we can start practising / playing with the review system.
cheers,
Mathieu
As for experimenting with the peer-review process: as Mathieu
wrote to the list, at the virt3c meeting Athina K. suggested
(and all present agreed) to experiment with a few texts in order
to identify any problems that may lie dormant in the overall
direction toward which we seem to be steering the peer-review
process (read 'signals') and see how these problems can be
resolved. For that purpose, I offered to send the list a number
of texts which were intended for publication in an online
journal which i helped edit, but which were never published on
that website. As a result, these texts have been in my archive
for about five years. Also, I don't know whether they have been
published elsewhere, online or offline, since then. What I am
saying - since not everyone on the list was at the virt3c
meeting - is that I do not have the permission of the authors to
post their texts on a public mailing list (like this one) with
the purpose to try out and fine-tune
the peer-review process. This will have to be done on a
non-publicly archived list where we can discuss the texts and
the review process without causing any unintended embarrassment
to the authors. Can we have a list for this?
Best,
g.
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal
****
Dr Mathieu O'Neil
Adjunct Research Fellow
Australian Demographic and Social Research Institute
College of Arts and Social Science
The Australian National University
email: mathieu.oneil[at]anu.edu.au
web: http://adsri.anu.edu.au/people/visitors/mathieu.php
[2 text/html]
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal