[Journal] Need Volunteers

[Sunburned Surveyor]

Dimitris,

I added you as a section editor to the Peer Review section of the
journal. You should be able to log-in to OJS as a section edtior to
review the article.

I tried adding you as a reviewer for that article, but your name
doesn't show up when I try to assign you as a reviewer directly. I
will have to ask Tyler about this.

Let me know if you can't get access to the article.

Landon

On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 7:35 AM, Sunburned Surveyor
<sunburned.surveyor at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dimitris,
>
> Thank you for volunteering to help us with the peer review article in
> Volume 6. I'll see if I can figure out how to add you as a reviewer to
> that section. In the meantime, I may just e-mail you a copy of the
> article text.
>
> I'll let you coordinate the review with Rafal, who has been doing a
> great job taking care of this section.
>
> When the review is complete, let me know. I'll get the comments from
> the three reviews packaged up and sent to the author.
>
> Rafal or Daniel: Can we sent a short e-mail to the author of the
> article letting him/her know our review is still in progress?
>
> Thanks for the help.
>
> Landon
>
> On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 2:21 AM, Dimitris Kotzinos <kotzino at csd.uoc.gr> wrote:
>> Hi Rafal,
>> good morning to you, too! :)
>>
>> I know more or less the process, so I think I will manage - for the blind
>> reviews I was merely referring to the fact that we can be more flexible of
>> course without compromising in any sense the reviewing process.
>> As for the "open access" vs. traditional publishing I think that it is a
>> matter of time. If a journal can guarantee the quality and will be indexed
>> will eventually gain the necessary momentum. On the other hand, I think that
>> it is understandable that this is a constant stream of revenue for the
>> publishers and they are not very keen of loosing it.
>> The "messiness" of the online open access journals is another issue. I think
>> if online open access journals want to be taken seriously they should adopt
>> some of the well established processes in publishing, including formatting
>> but also having steady publication cycles, a not always changing scientific
>> board and Editor-in-chief, call for papers to be published well in advance,
>> etc.
>> Of course, one issue of concern (especially in the academic world) id how
>> many journals can this world handle/use/accept and where are we going with
>> all the efforts, regardless of being open access or not ... But, this is
>> another long painful discussion ...
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Dimitris
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Rafal Wawer wrote:
>>>
>>> Kalimera Dimitris,
>>> Welcome on board! (-:
>>>
>>> For the secton editor working on OJS assuring double-blind review is not
>>> that difficult. You just remove authors' names in the text sent to
>>> reviewers. OJS cares for the rest, as every decision must go through the
>>> section editor and there is no direct connection between author and
>>> reviewer. You have to remember to check reviewers' comments thought, whether
>>> they are accidentaly signed. (-;
>>>
>>> IMO assuring double-blind review is a must at least in the peer review
>>> section. Recently I had an interesting conversation with one of professors
>>> about OpenAccess journals. Good publications tend to go to indexed journals
>>> although OpenAccess seem to promiss wider dissmination and citations...
>>> "Open journals do not have calculated IF" and IMO not applying good
>>> editorial practise won't help in taking them seriously. (-;
>>> Everyone says that OpenAcces is future, everyone complains about the
>>> commercial titles - "robbing authors from coyrights and money". As author
>>> you pay for the paper to be published, you loose the rights to it and
>>> everyone has to pay to read it. On the other hand from scientific point fo
>>> view, OpenAcces is still not taken seriously enough, so the scientists
>>> (especially those mature ones) complain but don't do much to change the
>>> status quo. They also complain, that open journals are often quite messy -
>>> "gorilla journals" (-; as basing upon volountary work is often a sunstantial
>>> challange - I think we know it to be true (-;
>>> For me is is a pitty, that through "traditional" scientific publication
>>> system, the access to knowledge, especially in the environmental domain, is
>>> closed or limited for the developing countries.
>>>
>>> Best regards:
>>> Raf
>>>
>>> Dr. Rafal Wawer
>>> K.U.Leuven
>>> R&D Division SADL (Spatial Application Division)
>>> Celestijnenlaan 200e bus 2224
>>> BE-3001 Leuven-Heverlee
>>> Belgium
>>> tel. 0032 16 329731
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: newsletter-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
>>> [mailto:newsletter-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Dimitris Kotzinos
>>> Sent: 09 February 2010 08:26
>>> To: newsletter at lists.osgeo.org
>>> Subject: [Journal] Need Volunteers
>>>
>>> Landon,
>>>
>>> I can do the Peer Review Section.
>>> I will just need to know what is there and for you to add me as a section
>>> editor.
>>>
>>> As for the blind review it usually goes both ways: the reviewer does not
>>> know the authors' names and the authors never learn who the reviewers were.
>>> But if we are talking for an article or two there is no need for the
>>> section editors to make things amazingly complicated - we can trust them
>>> that they will find the proper reviewers if they cannot or do not want to
>>> review them by themselves. Moreover we are not a peer reviewed journal so we
>>> do not need to be extremely strict, as long as we keep the good practices
>>> and defend the name of the journal.
>>>
>>> Dimitris
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> newsletter mailing list
>>> newsletter at lists.osgeo.org
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/newsletter
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> newsletter mailing list
>> newsletter at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/newsletter
>>
>