10603Re: [MEFAwards] Re: looking for a volunteer
- Jul 6, 2010Hiya Eryn Lasgalen,
> You mean a third party will be reading our emails? I had no idea. I"Skim" is probably a better description than "read." The volunteer just
> would almost rather risk having to see a flame than lose the expectation
> of privacy.
needs to make sure that replies aren't flames of some kind, because
they're going out under the "MEFA" name. (The email address they'll be
coming from is mefareviews@....) To many people, this makes it
seem like the reply is somehow from the MEFAs as an institution, or that
we approve of what was said because we're passing it on. So a flamey
review might not only create bad feelings between the reviewer and that
particular author, but between the reviewer and the *MEFAs.* That's
something we need to avoid.
Believe me, we don't want it to be like big brother peeking over your
shoulder! Our volunteers have better things to do anyway. We're just
trying to strike the right balance between protecting the MEFA name (so
most people have a positive association rather than a negative one with
it) and giving authors and reviewers a service they have asked for. But
if you feel we're erring too far toward one side or the other, we can
always consider it in our post-mortem after the awards. If you ever see
something you would like us to consider changing, you can suggest it at
and the volunteers will consider it for 2011 once this year's awards are
> Idle question: what if the review reply is a flame? Does the reviewerIf we decide a review is a flame, we'll reply back to the author saying
> then not get to see it?
we haven't passed the reply on. So no, the reviewer doesn't get to see
it. But the author *knows* the review wasn't passed on for some reason
or another, so they can try to get in touch some other way if they like.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>