[Tccc] Requesting open feedback to my work (Re: Promoting open on-line research)
Emmanuel Lochin
emmanuel.lochin
Thu Nov 3 06:59:37 EDT 2011
On 3 November 2011 11:42, Noster K?hn <noster.kuhn at gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Just a litle example:
>
> IEEE ICC 2012:
>
> Deadline for paper submission : ?30/09/2011
> Deadline for Review ? ? ? ? ? : ?05-08/09/2011
> Notification ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?: ?09/01/2012
> Camera Ready ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?: ?10/02/2012
> Conference ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ?: ?10-15/06/2012
> Publication ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? : ?August'12 in the best case.
>
>
> Now, The paper has been in review for 5-6 weeks, but it will take about a
> year to hope for the paper to be available online for "spreading this new
> knowledge".
Honestly, nobody waits for the online publication. The paper is
usually available in arxiv or any publishing system before (or on the
author's webpage with a reference
such as "Accepted for publication in ...") I've never experienced a
problem to access to a scientific content.
> My two cents.
> Noster
>
> On Thu, Nov 3, 2011 at 11:28 AM, 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?
>>
>> 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?
>>
>> I mean, the fact that you post online a paper does not make the paper
>> automatically correct, interesting, or actually ?providing a real
>> contribution. 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?
>>
>> 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.
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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"
More information about the TCCC
mailing list