[Tccc] Requesting open feedback to my work (Re: Promoting open on-line research)
Pars Mutaf
pars.mutaf
Thu Nov 3 07:28:58 EDT 2011
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 <
luigi at net.t-labs.tu-berlin.de> 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 <
> >> m_usman_ashraf at hotmail.com>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: pars.mutaf at gmail.com
> >>>>> To: touch at isi.edu
> >>>>> CC: tccc at lists.cs.columbia.edu
> >>>>> 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 <touch at isi.edu> 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.
> >>>>> Tccc at lists.cs.columbia.edu
> >>>>> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
> >>>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> IEEE Communications Society Tech. Committee on Computer Communications
> >>> (TCCC) - for discussions on computer networking and communication.
> >>> Tccc at lists.cs.columbia.edu
> >>> 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.
> > Tccc at lists.cs.columbia.edu
> > https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
>
>
More information about the TCCC
mailing list