Tim Tyler  wrote:
Subject: Sbe Peer Review

> > > > JE:-
> > > > Would TT please comment on a proposal
> > > > for sbe to set up an elected review
> > > > panel in order to electronically publish 
> > > > sbe peer reviewed papers.

> > > TT:-
> > > I can't think of much to say to that :-|
> > > I rather doubt whether I'd want to be personally involved - as
> > > reviewer, reviewed or voter - in any such scheme.

> > JE:-
> > Would TT please outline his case against
> > such a scheme for the benefit of sbe readers.

> TT:-
> I have no case against such a scheme.
> Want to set one up?  Be my guest.

JE:-
I am trying to understand why you negatively
commented "I rather doubt whether I'd want 
to be personally involved - as reviewer, 
reviewed or voter - in any such scheme".
I think that sbe peer review for electronically
published papers would provide tangible benefits.
To be able to set it up, cooperation between
sbe subscribers is required. Neutrality
does not help one way or the other. Since
you did appear negative to the idea, I thought
that you might like to share your reasons why
with sbe readers. I think sbe reader's would 
welcome any ideas, for or against, on this 
proposition. 

Regards,

John Edser
Independent Researcher

PO Box 266
Church Pt
NSW 2105
Australia

edser{at}tpg.com.au
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 11/13/04 5:55:33 AM