[e2e] double bland reviewing

[Joe Touch]

Jon Crowcroft wrote:

> so certain conferences have a tradition of double blind
> submission/review process to minimse the effect of
> "oh its by so and so so it must be {brilliant|rubbish}"
> 
> some people have been known to post TRs to this (and similar lists)
> just before the submission date to achieve certain effecs
> i) familiarity amongst possible subset of reviewer pool
> ii) feedback about paper to improve it before submitting....
> 
> these are not necessarily bad things, except for the 
> iii) "brand recognition effect"
> 
> how about we setup a parallel list to e2e, which is closed
> member-only submission, but anonimyzed.

Can you be more specific? You want to strip all attribution about who is
posting?

> so then people could "safely" post drafts to get community feedback
> without breaching etiquette

It might be required to have a place (e.g., postel.org) where people
could post docs without mailing them as attachments. I.e., if I post an
anonymized paper, then you know who's posting it...

> I have here (affecting a Tom Lehrer voice/accent) a modest example I
> prepared earier of just such a possible submission - this is, of
> course, not by me, but by my evil twin at Some Other Cambridge
> University Computer Laboratory

Thus the email source question above ;-)

> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Self Similarity in the Arrival Process of 
> Network Systems Architectures considered Harmful

Have you considered Sigcomm's OO session as an alternative ;-)

Joe

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 250 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://www.postel.org/pipermail/end2end-interest/attachments/20040423/9475ed10/signature.bin