[Corpora-List] why LREC2012 NOT blind-reviewed?

[Isabella.Chiari at uniroma1.it]

I never noticed the fact that LREC did not use blind-reviewing. Maybe because in this call is particularly evident, that's why I asked.

I personally like long abstract submission (and evaluation) rather than full paper. But I am not so convinced by non-anonymous submission. It true that it requires unnatural writing practices, but it certainly helps the reading and evaluating process. As a reviewer I do not feel very confortable with the name of the author on the abstract because it is very difficult to be completely objective expecially if it is someone you know. I think it may interfere (positively, rather than negatively on acceptace). But I do not know if this opinion is shared.

It is also true that this problem is felt in small calls, rather than in big conferences like LREC.
Best regards,
Isabella



Sent from my iPad

On 30 Sep 2011, at 17:48, "Diana Maynard" <d.maynard at dcs.shef.ac.uk> wrote:

> Agreed - and a lot of conferences these days actually seem to be moving 
> AWAY from blind reviewing (for exactly the reasons that Yorick mentions).
> Diana
> 
> On 30/09/11 16:27, Yorick Wilks wrote:
> > I disagree strongly. I dont see why all conferences should be exactly
> > like all others. Extended abstracts are less of a burden on busy
> > academics --both as writers and reviewers----and there is no evidence
> > they lower the final quality; COLING used to do this and I am sorry it
> > changed. The whole blind-review business is a huge nonsense: I rarely
> > meet a paper to review where i cannot identify the authors from a
> > careful trawl of hidden signals and the references. Trying to make a
> > paper genuinely anonymous is almost impossible if one has a body of past
> > work and publication to link it to---the mental gymnastics required are
> > undignified and best avoided. LRECs reputation has grown steadily and it
> > will be the quality of its papers that sustain it--there is no evidence
> > at all anonymity would improve matters in the least. if it ain't
> > broke........
> > Yorick Wilks
> 
> _______________________________________________
> UNSUBSCRIBE from this page: http://mailman.uib.no/options/corpora
> Corpora mailing list
> Corpora at uib.no
> http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/corpora/attachments/20110930/2c33e37d/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
UNSUBSCRIBE from this page: http://mailman.uib.no/options/corpora
Corpora mailing list
Corpora at uib.no
http://mailman.uib.no/listinfo/corpora