[Corpora-List] Blind reviewing

[Hans Uszkoreit]

Thanks Chris, this seems a nice conclusion of the somewhat lengthy but 
nevertheless inspiring discussion: For the time being, our top-level
scientific conference will have to continue the current practice of 
double-blind reviewing despite its observed leaks and shortcomings.
The LREC move is justified (at least for some types of papers) and 
deserves careful monitoring for lessons to be learned. 

Any further discussion on expected or desired future turns in our academic
culture should observe and include developments in other disciplines
(natural sciences - the usual trend setters, engineering sciences and 
social sciences), since with respect to quality management the conditions
of our field are not unique.

Hans Uszkoreit


On Oct 12, 2011, at 11:30 PM, Chris Brew wrote:

>> 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


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