On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 2:53 PM, Luigi Iannone <[email protected] > wrote:
> Hi Pars, > > I am not sure I understand your last email. > > In particular I fail to see any answer to my clarification questions. > We are here the one who asks for help: There is a problem. What can we do? Some people here clearly agree that there is problem. If you don't see the problem, I don't know you can do for us. > > thanks > > Luigi > > On Nov 3, 2011, at 12:28 , Pars Mutaf wrote: > > Hi Luigi, > > Please all stop calling it "your" approach it is not mine.... Check arxiv, > IETF, liquidpub, etc. > > Please see below: > > On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 12:28 PM, Luigi Iannone < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On Nov 3, 2011, at 10:46 , Pars Mutaf wrote: >> >> [snip] >> >> 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. >> > >> >> Pars, >> >> Why should we trust your system without questioning it? >> If that is what you want why you are opening the discussion on this >> mailing list? >> >> > > Why do you defend the current system and not think of a new one? See the > petition for > some serious problems that we have in the current one: > > > http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/replacing-scientific-conferences-with-a-cheap-and-effic.html > > > >> Let me take advantage of this mail to raise another point (please correct >> me if I misunderstood your model). >> >> You stated several times that conferences take too long to provide >> feedback. >> >> How much time do you think will take in your open system for a paper to >> have sufficient review feedback so that it can become a meaningful >> publication? >> >> > How can you contribute to this problem? > > > >> I mean, the fact that you post online a paper does not make the paper >> automatically correct, interesting, or actually providing a real >> contribution. > > > > The fact that it is published in a conference makes it interesting or > useful? > > > >> So I wouldn't consider it a real publication that can be referenced until >> either I review it myself (but I cannot review all the papers I cite in my >> publications) or I wait that someone else does the review. >> >> And what are the incentives to review in your model? Why should I >> actually spend time on your paper? >> >> > How can we solve this problem? What model do you propose? > > > >> In conferences and journals there an organizational infrastructure that >> guarantees me that as I do review for others people articles other people >> will review my paper. In your open system it may happens that I spend time >> reviewing papers and nobody will ever have a look at my papers. >> >> > You think that there is no solution? Check for example the IETF model, it > has been working for decades. > > Why defend the current system I don't get your point. Please explain. > > Pars > > > > > >> ciao >> >> Luigi >> >> >> >> > >> 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 >> >> > > _______________________________________________ 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
