[Corpora-List] Blind reviewing

[Chris Brew]

> But of course this may also be a community/cultural issue. Depending
> on the communities and their size and previous kind of interactions,
> different policies may work and/or be cherished by the community.
>

This is the key issue. It is difficult for me to imagine ACL moving
away from double-blind review, simply because double-blind review of
full papers is the prevailing norm in high-prestige computer science
conferences, and many researchers are in the business of competing for
tenure-track  positions in computer science, so need conferences with
those rules. There is obviously a role for NLP conferences run by and
for the benefit of academics.

Equally, LREC has good reason to encourage the kind of papers that
could not possibly be anonymised. Nobody should ever have to write "We
discuss the impact of our innovations in Machine Aided Human
Translation for the translation practice of the central administrative
body of a large group of nations operating under legal and political
constraints that require massive multilinguality,,," in order to
preserve the "anonymity" of the European Commission. LREC seems to be
to be trying to serve the language industries in general, so academics
should not be upset or cross if it is not entirely dedicated to
academic concerns.

Perhaps the conventions of how academic prestige works are overdue for
radical change, and we should be talking about that instead. Perhaps
the internet has already blown up the whole  cultural edifice, the
world has moved on, and we are the last to notice. That would be so
typical.


-- 
Chris Brew, Educational Testing Service

_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE from this page: http://mailman.uib.no/options/corpora
Corpora mailing list
Corpora at uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora