[Journal] Peer Review: Blind?

[Daniel Ames]

Actually I think that was my question (or both of us). I agree though
that blind is a good idea - particularly in our small community. This
allows a reviewer to give more constructive critiques than he/she
might otherwise... -Dan

On Mon, Feb 8, 2010 at 6:21 PM, Sunburned Surveyor
<sunburned.surveyor at gmail.com> wrote:
> Rafal raised and important question that I wanted to bring before the
> group. Do we want our peer reivews to be "blind"? I'm not an expert,
> but I believe this means the author receives the peer review comments
> without identifying the reviewer. It sounds like this is pretty
> standard practice.
>
> Is that how we want to operate the peer review portion of the Journal,
> or is there another model that people want to follow?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Landon
> _______________________________________________
> newsletter mailing list
> newsletter at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/newsletter
>



-- 
Daniel P. Ames, Ph.D. PE
Associate Professor, Geosciences
Idaho State University - Idaho Falls
amesdani at isu.edu
geology.isu.edu
www.hydromap.com
www.mapwindow.org

*************************************************************************
See you at MapWindow GIS 2010!
Orlando, Florida, USA
31 March - 2 April 2010
http://www.mapwindow.org/conference/2010

Also at:
AWRA GIS 2010: http://www.awra.org/meetings/Florida2010/
IEMSS 2010: http://www.iemss.org/iemss2010/
*************************************************************************