LIBLICENSE-L Archives

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum

LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU
Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Date:
Mon, 11 Jun 2012 18:27:13 -0400
Reply-To:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Re: Access to peer review information
MIME-Version:
1.0
Message-ID:
<[log in to unmask]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
Sender:
LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>
From:
LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (24 lines) 
From: "Mr. Gunn" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 11 Jun 2012 13:51:03 -0500

On Sun, 10 Jun 2012 18:47:36 -0400, Sandy Thatcher wrote:

>From: Sandy Thatcher <[log in to unmask]>
>Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2012 12:50:56 -0500
>
>In sketching an alternative system, she emphasizes that its
>success depends on "prioritizing members' work on behalf of the
>community" (p. 43). Reputation in such a system requires some way of
>reviewing the reviewers. The ability to publish might therefore be
>based on measurements of how "helpful" a scholar is in participating
>in group discussion.� A system like this will "require a phenomenal
>amount of labor" as well as a new set of metrics for reviewing the
>reviewers,

Those following this thread may be interested to learn about
<http://hypothes.is/>, which has already built much of the necessary
technical infrastructure for a system quite similar to what Kathleen
describes. Great minds think alike...

William Gunn

ATOM RSS1 RSS2