<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; ">You have to start from the beginning of the thread--the topic was the LREC system of non-blind abstracts for review.<div>YW</div><div><br><div><div>On 12 Oct 2011, at 13:38, Laurence Anthony wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite"><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 8:38 PM, Yorick Wilks <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Y.Wilks@dcs.shef.ac.uk">Y.Wilks@dcs.shef.ac.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<div style="word-wrap:break-word">Very good points! <div>There are clearly very good arguments both for and against blind reviewing. It may be best if both systems stay in play in different conferences and our public eventually express what they prefer.</div>
<div>Yorick Wilks</div><div><div></div><div class="h5"><div><br></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Maybe I missed something but what exactly is the alternative system to blind reviewing that is being referred to in the phrase "both systems". Obviously, "against blind reviewing" is not a system in itself. Am I correct in assuming that the 'alternative system' being proposed on this list is simply an open one where both reviewers and authors know each others' names? </div>
<div><br></div><div>Laurence.</div></div>
_______________________________________________<br>UNSUBSCRIBE from this page: <a href="http://mailman.uib.no/options/corpora">http://mailman.uib.no/options/corpora</a><br>Corpora mailing list<br><a href="mailto:Corpora@uib.no">Corpora@uib.no</a><br>http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora<br></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>