AE
________________________________________
From: tccc-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu [tccc-bounces@lists.cs.columbia.edu] On Behalf Of Mark Allman [mallman@icir.org]
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 2010 3:35 PM
To: Anthony Ephremides
Cc: 'Victor Bahl'; 'Mani Srivastava'; tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu; Joe Touch
Subject: Re: [Tccc] Different community, similar problems? (Henning Schulzrinne)
> Part of the problem (rather big part) is that in some segments of the
> community the perception of what conferences are and what archival
> journals are, does not agree with the perception in other parts of the
> community.
Agreed.
> The "real" research results that are scrutinized and are carefully
> reviewed with the possibility of rebuttal and resolution and for which
> the writing should be optimized are and should be found in archival
> journals. Conferences are forums for early exposure and exchange of
> ideas. So, acceptance at a conference should not be a big deal. And
> hence, while gleaning out the real garbage, most of the papers that
> have some merit should be accepted. Mistakes of both kinds (i.e. good
> papers that are rejected and bad papers that are accepted) will
> necessarily be made under the strict deadlines of conference reviews
> and with the preponderance of immature reviewers and TPC members which
> is unavoidable with the explosive number of conferences, workshops,
> and symposia.
I accept that as the traditional view of publishing. But, it is not
clear to me that this is For Sure The Right View. We have clearly
evolved to something else entirely. And, I am not sure where we have
ended up is particularly wrong. It is different.
allman
_______________________________________________
Tccc mailing list
Tccc@lists.cs.columbia.edu
https://lists.cs.columbia.edu/cucslists/listinfo/tccc
No comments:
Post a Comment