I can't help drawing parallels with the peer-review process of
Wouldn't using something like Open Conference Systems
http://pkp.sfu.ca/?q=ocs greatly assist with auto-anthologizing?
I'm not a code-goddess by any means, so I'm not volunteering to do
this on behalf of CODE4LIB anthology. I'm just thinking out loud here.
At 08:55 AM 2/15/2007, you wrote:
>I was thinking of this as similar to the code4libcon process: put up
>lots of proposals, set some kind of target size, and open up voting,
>maybe with some tampering by the editor(s) to make sure the final
>product has some balance. I had thought about an "All-Star Game" rule as
>well: every blog in Planet Code4Lib gets at least one posting (in the
>interests of boosting sales).
>So I don't see any problem with nominating your own stuff (as I did,
>indirectly), but I'd rather not see nominations removed - you may not be
>the best judge of your own stuff, after all. But maybe we could allow
>author's comments on the nomination list ("Please don't vote for this,
>that one's better") to guide the process. Can that wiki do tables? I'd
>like to add a wordcount column as well (people can use the FF wordcount
>extension) so we can get a sense of the size of the thing.
>From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
>Sent: Thursday, February 15, 2007 9:00 AM
>To: [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] auto-anthologizing
>On Thu, 15 Feb 2007, Edward Summers wrote:
> > But I also think it would be nice to have Peter as this years editor,
> > and allow him to cherry pick and organize the content as he sees fit.
>Wait, so should I not have been adding posts from various blogs myself?
>I thought the idea was that any of us could nominate posts from others'
>blogs by adding them to the wiki, and then we'd all vote... or did you
>just mean that you think Peter (or The Editors, Whomever They Shall Be)
>should have ultimate say of which voted-on posts go into the final
>collection, and in what order, etc.?