[Journal] Peer Review: Blind?

[Micha Silver]

On 09/02/2010 03:31, Daniel Ames wrote:
> 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
>
>    
I seem to recall that we discussed this question about a year (?) ago. 
THere's something called "double blind" which I think we thought was 
unnecessary.

> 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
>>
>>      
>
>
>    


-- 
Micha Silver
http://www.surfaces.co.il/
Arava Development Co.  +972-52-3665918