Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Re: ***[Possible UCE]***

Expand Messages
  • James Eckman
    ... Would you really use your SCA names for peer review? I d find it hysterical myself but I m not a big fan of academia. ... Ouch! That one is really tough,
    Message 1 of 2 , Apr 12, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      >From: Solveig <nostrand@...>
      >
      >
      >The real obstacles to which are:
      >
      >1. But, Mistress Floozy is a LAUREL!
      >
      >
      Would you really use your SCA names for peer review? I'd find it
      hysterical myself but I'm not a big fan of academia.

      >2. Insisting upon periodical publication
      >
      >
      Ouch! That one is really tough, especially with what would probably
      would be an unpaid position.

      >3. Erratic swings in publication policy with changes in editor.
      >
      >
      Don't change editors ;) Unless they really suck. So who's the future
      John Campbell:)

      >The case with Bruel &al is the need for a monograph series. There are
      >some of these around, however they are often focused in ways which
      >results in perfectly good books falling through the cracks.
      >
      >
      Typical small press, this one's for Meiji period stuff. I suspect it's a
      one man show.

      http://www.ridgebackpress.com/

      He does offer electronic subscriptions to his journal, I find that
      interesting. The internet has certainly widened my search area for books
      in general and publishing on demand may grow up some day. Still hard to
      beat a good book for ease of use and appearance.

      Jim
    • Anthony J. Bryant
      ... Well, there s peer review, and then there s Peer review... Effingham
      Message 2 of 2 , Apr 12, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        James Eckman wrote:

        >>1. But, Mistress Floozy is a LAUREL!
        >>
        > Would you really use your SCA names for peer review? I'd find it
        > hysterical myself but I'm not a big fan of academia.

        Well, there's peer review, and then there's Peer review... <G>


        Effingham
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.