Asking question is the way of clarifying doubt. All created things following the laws of space and time must be flawed. Hence, both current and the proposed systems will have flaws. While some of the points mentioned here ( http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/replacing-scientific-conferences-with-a-cheap-and-effic.html) seem to be reasonable, I see some critical problems. May be I am again asking the same questions others already have put forward.
1. Though the idea of “on-line archive” seems to be attractive, such centralization in digital world could draw numerous numbers of submissions to a single archive that could be again left for long time without reviews! How many “on-line archives” should be there? 2. If Step 3: “When the community and authors decide that the article is ready for publication, the authors submit it to a journal using the current system. The article is published with their names.” is followed, the same problem of taking long time exists. What is meant by ‘community’? How many people/scientists? 3. Previously it was noted that a scientific conference does not only provide a forum for scientific researchers, but also many things could be learnt from direct human-to-human communications that you might not find in your own surroundings or in the digital world. Sitting in from of the monitor does not give the idea how much a work could scale to a different infrastructure and settings. 4. While blocking conference travel might save money, reduce carbon emission, and provide other facilities, the learning from a different setting or environment will be less or none, which will hamper the actual scientific progress that could be applied overall for the mankind. *The better idea could be: * 1. Keep the conferences as they are now (online or physical). People may or may not attend, local or international (based on capability). 2. Submit your works to the archive systems. If people are interested, they will automatically read those. It would be rather better to make some system that announces arrival of such-and-such paper in the digital archive. We should have choice of topics so that papers are notified to us using some filtering system. Then, I will have choice to read it or not, comment it or not. 3. Naturally go for journals for publication. Best Regards, Sakib http://staff.iium.edu.my/sakib/ On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 5:46 PM, Pars Mutaf <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 11:17 AM, Emmanuel Lochin > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > On 3 November 2011 09:45, Pars Mutaf <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Usman, > > > > > > The method you are suggesting means that we need to wait 6 months for > > > feedback (3-5 reviews). > > > > Hi Pars, > > > > Why do you think it would be faster with your proposal? > > I saw that you requested a review for one of your paper, but how long > > you expect to get real reviews? I mean, not from your friends, > > colleagues or collaborators. > > Who is going to stand whether the reviewer is skilled or not? > > If the reviewer is not anonymous, who would risk to send a review that > > might be qualified as bad by the author or another person? > > > > I think you should clearly expose the rules of your system, I really > > do not understand how does it work. > > > > Hi Emmanuel, > > Normally you should come with answer not questions (it is not only my > idea). > I mean: Question the current system not the new one to come. > > > http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/replacing-scientific-conferences-with-a-cheap-and-effic.html > Pars > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Emmanuel > > > > > > > Pars > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 10:08 AM, Usman Ashraf < > > [email protected]>wrote: > > > > > >> Dear All, > > >> > > >> Is there a point that I'm missing? why don't we just submit our work > to > > a > > >> reputed journal for feedback? > > >> Most reputed journals don't charge anything, don't cost as much as > > >> conferences and provide us with a decent feedback. > > >> > > >> regards > > >> Usman. > > >> > > >> > Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2011 09:43:11 +0200 > > >> > From: [email protected] > > >> > To: [email protected] > > >> > CC: [email protected] > > >> > Subject: [Tccc] Requesting open feedback to my work (Re: Promoting > > open > > >> on-line research) > > >> > > >> > > > >> > Hi all, > > >> > > > >> > Could you please send feedback for the following work. I don't want > to > > >> > submit it to conferences just for feedback. I would therefore need > > your > > >> > opinion: > > >> > > > >> > http://arxiv.org/abs/1103.5115 > > >> > > > >> > Or, please point me to me to a list working on this kind of topic. > > >> > > > >> > Pars > > >> > > > >> > PS: Based on the below idea, this is a test for open research. > > >> > > > >> > On Wed, Nov 2, 2011 at 5:20 PM, Joe Touch <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > On 11/1/2011 11:37 PM, Pars Mutaf wrote: > > >> > > ... > > >> > > > > >> > > Conferences may have the benefits that are listed above. The > > problem is > > >> > >> being tied to conferences just for receiving feedback. > > >> > >> > > >> > > > > >> > > It's useful to appreciate that it has always been possible to > write > > >> drafts > > >> > > and tech reports and post them - either via direct email, or to > > lists* > > >> for > > >> > > discussion or feedback. > > >> > > > > >> > > *This list in particular is intended for exactly this kind of > > >> discussion; > > >> > > we are often overrun with CFPs, but they is NOT the primary > > motivation > > >> for > > >> > > this list.* > > >> > > > > >> > > Joe (TCCC Chair) > > >> > > > > >> > > *it's more useful to post only the abstract, not the full text or > > PDF > > >> FWIW. > > >> > > > > >> > > *there are many IEEE Comsoc TCs; it's always useful to post your > > ideas > > >> to > > >> > > the TC most specific to your work. > > >> > > > > >> > _______________________________________________ > > >> > IEEE Communications Society Tech. Committee on Computer > Communications > > >> > (TCCC) - for discussions on computer networking and communication. > > >> > [email protected] > > >> > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc > > >> > > > _______________________________________________ > > > IEEE Communications Society Tech. Committee on Computer Communications > > > (TCCC) - for discussions on computer networking and communication. > > > [email protected] > > > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > "This email and any attachments are confidential. They may contain > legally > > privileged information or copyright material. You should not read, copy, > > use > > or disclose them without authorisation. If you are not an intended > > recipient, please contact us at once by return email and then delete both > > messages. We do not accept liability in connection with computer virus, > > data corruption, delay, interruption, unauthorised access or unauthorised > > amendment. This notice should not be removed" > > > _______________________________________________ > IEEE Communications Society Tech. Committee on Computer Communications > (TCCC) - for discussions on computer networking and communication. > [email protected] > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc > -- Al-Sakib Khan Pathan, Ph.D. Assistant Professor & FYP Coordinator Department of Computer Science Kulliyyah (Faculty) of Information and Communication Technology International Islamic University Malaysia (IIUM) Jalan Gombak, 53100, Kuala Lumpur, MALAYSIA Tel: +603-61964000 Ext. 5653, Cell: +60163910754 E-Mails: [email protected], [email protected] URLs: http://staff.iium.edu.my/sakib/ https://sites.google.com/site/spathansite/ _______________________________________________ IEEE Communications Society Tech. Committee on Computer Communications (TCCC) - for discussions on computer networking and communication. [email protected] https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
