Re: [Tccc] Different community, similar problems? (Henning Schulzrinne)

Earlier this week I attended the CRA Snowbird conference, a bi-annual meeting of computing department heads and deans. There was a session on Peer Review that touched on many of these issues. One takeaway is that the things we see in networking are also been experienced in essentially all computing sub-fields. The second is that the CRA might be inclined to do something that would look at these issues. I don't know what followup will take place, but I'll be watching for it and am happy to share whatever comes down the pike.

Ellen

On Jul 22, 2010, at 4:07 AM, Sue Moon wrote:

> I concur that conferences are the primary venue for publication in my case
> and for most colleagues I know.
>
> But there are shortcomings of conference-oriented publication practise.
> First, conference deadlines impose an artificial
> temporal constraint on the way we do research. Some can argue that you
> first
> do research, and then think about a publication venue. But what if you just
> missed the deadline by a week or two for the best venue for your work?
> Do you wait a year? Or look for other venues? Have you ever sent your paper
> to
> several conferences until it is finally accepted? Of course the paper could
> have
> improved greatly. But enough to justify the delay in publication?
>
> Both conferences and journals in our field have a relatively long
> turn-around time
> compared to other fields, e.g. physics. For conferences, we synchronize
> reviews
> and camera-ready preparation and they add delay.
>
> Conference or journal, if we could make sure that reviews are done well,
> why should it matter?
>
> -Sue
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Tccc mailing list
> Tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu
> https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc

_______________________________________________
Tccc mailing list
Tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc