Hi Mathieu, hi all,
I will be very glad to help too.
Unfortunately since Hull I haven't been able to catch up, but
things are
going to slow down a little bit starting in the two weeks, so I
will be
extremely happy to review the Johan and Nate pieces, as well as
writingsomething else in that stream (I refer to ANT in my work)
Best
Maurizio
Il giorno lun, 03/05/2010 alle 11.40 +0100, Athina Karatzogianni ha
scritto:
[Converted from multipart/alternative]
[1 text/plain]
Hi Mathieu and all
Nice work, looking forward to the assignment of reviewers, I d
be happy to
help, did you set a word limit for the reviewer (for example
500-800-1000
words) and a final structure of how that would be done (I am
referring to
the two-tier structure and the idiosyncratic character of the
journal)? it d
help to have a finalised template for reviewers to follow,
some kind of
instructions which explain the practical elements of this and
also a brief
explanation of the ideology behind it beyond referencing. If
you have done
that, I ve been on the site it wasnt clear to me, can you
resend the link to
follow for reviewing when/if you assign reviewers? I was also
lost as to how
reviwers are assigned, do people express interest on a
particular piece?
Sorry if you have answered all this, I might seem out of touch
with this,
its been a really busy last couple of months
Thanks
athina
On Sat, May 1, 2010 at 11:53 AM, Mathieu ONeil
<mathieu.oneil anu.edu.au>wrote:>
[Converted from multipart/alternative]
[1 text/plain]
Hi all
After a period of regrouping and latency, get ready for a
burst of
activity. I will shortly post a proposal for the journal
site architecture,
hope yall like it.
But first, some informations.
Someone we met in Hull and Amsterdam is Nate Tkacz, who was
one of the
organisers of the CPOV conference. As a result a dialogue
started between
Johan Soderbergh and Nate on the politics of that strand of
research known
as Actor-Network Theory (ANT). I am pleased to report that
this dialogue has
solidified into two excellent short pieces. I am thinking of
writing a
follow-up. These will soon be posted to the site for
comment. They will be
for our "opinion" section so no need to formally peer review
them. Nate
expressed an interest in joining us and after considering
the enthusiasm he
put into this exchange I invited him to join our SC. So,
welcome to our
newest member!
I ran into another CPOV organizer, Johanna Niesyto yesterday
at a
conference in Paris and she reminded me of our invitation to
them to write a
conference report. We decided the best way to do this would
be to determine
a series of set questions (what did you try to achieve, best
moment, etc)
that could then be asked to any other conference organizer
for our "report"
section (1000 words max).
I just invited her to join the list, hopefully she will be
interested,> > otherwise we will discuss here and I will tell her.
Re. research papers I still have to formally ask reviewers.
This is top of
my list. Sorry for delay.
Re. style for the journal I am leaning towards a more
minimal approach. In
part this is due to seeing one too many super-slick powerpoint
presentations. Ultimately I find all the super-slick
animations distracting.
We need it to be clean and striking. For the homepage I'm
thinking all white
background with black and one extra colour text only. Small
font. For
article space something like First Monday would be fine.
Ultimately the
content is what will make this worth coming back to.
Thats all for now,
cheers,
Mathieu
[2 text/html]
______________________________
http://www.oekonux.org/journal