REPLY How to promote good work (SD6620)

[SDMAIL oner]

Posted by  oner at boun.edu.tr

Quoting SDMAIL George Richardson <gpr at albany.edu>:
>> Our journal has an international editorial board that similarly works  
>> hard to present to its readers the very best work in the field.  And  
>> it publishes applied work as well as academic work (as an academic  
>> doing applied work I don't like that distinction, but others  
>> apparently want to be able to make it).  Accepting an article for  
>> publication is a form of adulation that serves a very high purpose in  
>> a field:  it leads to the regular appearance of the best submitted  
>> work, so it serves to show what really good work should look like.    
>> Flagging high quality work is indeed constructive for a field.
>> 
>> I have to hope that the filtering that goes on to select award  
>> winners and journal publications searches for methodological  
>> correctness rather than "political" correctness.  

------------------
My idea of "peer review process" is "improvement" of the submitted work,
not its rejection and elimination. This brings in the concept of "waiting 
time" which may be longer for some submitted papers.

SDR editorial team members need to change their attitude and behavior (actions).
Paper with "irrelevant" political message, but with no real modeling 
qualities is easily accepted. Our paper is rejected, although it reports 
improvement on a model published in SDR.

Greetings,

M. Atilla Öner
Posted by  oner at boun.edu.tr
posting date  Thu, 13 Sep 2007 14:40:32 +0300