Addition to my last e-mail: What changes would you require in the petition to sign it?
Pars On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 1:39 PM, Pars Mutaf <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 12:56 PM, Sakib Pathan <[email protected]>wrote: > >> 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. >> >> > Yes this my opinion too.. We just need to augment archive systems with > online discussion. > > Personally, if I see a paper in which I am interested I give feedback > without waiting anything in return. This comes naturally from the need to > talk about the topic. Because I like the topic. > > Cheers, > > Pars > > > > >> 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
