Just a quick response to David Goodman, who writes, "But why on earth propose a mechansism which gives such weight to the PhD, recognizing neither the variation in the abilities of those without it, and in those with it. (and not noticing that many of the PHDs here intend to work a little outside their particular academic fields. )"
Well, of course anyone who has given this much thought has noticed that. Editors will have editorial authority only with regard to their disciplines and their specific areas of expertise. So, most physicists will not be able to approve literature articles. Indeed, most editors can be expected to do much of their work not as editors but as authors, since they'll be working outside of their areas much of the time. "I suggest a better criterion: successful writing or editing of articles, is what qualifies an editor." Quick question: how do you evaluate "successful writing or editing of articles," and who evaluates it? I have a way to answer that question; what's yours? --Larry _______________________________________________ Citizendium-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.purdue.edu/mailman/listinfo/citizendium-l
