[Sigmet-officers] Bidding

Thu Mar 31 14:10:07 EDT 2011

Dear Dietmar,
Actually easychair has a bidding system, but the bidding process takes extra
time, so it might be better that Jonathan and you distribute the papers.
Regards,
Judit

On Thu, Mar 31, 2011 at 7:50 PM, <sigmet-officers-request at asis.org> wrote:

> Send Sigmet-officers mailing list submissions to
>        sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>        http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>        sigmet-officers-request at mail.asis.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>        sigmet-officers-owner at mail.asis.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Sigmet-officers digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: Update on the paper contest (Dietmar Wolfram)
>   2. Re: Update on the paper contest (Jonathan Levitt)
>   3. Re: Update on the paper contest (Dietmar Wolfram)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 08:19:29 -0500 (CDT)
> From: Dietmar Wolfram <dwolfram at uwm.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
> To: Cassidy Sugimoto <cassidysugimoto at gmail.com>
> Cc: SIG MET <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
> Message-ID:
>        <
> 585091429.20397.1301577569797.JavaMail.root at mail01.pantherlink.uwm.edu>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>
>
> I also like the idea of including criteria for quality and originality.
>
>
>
> It looks like EasyChair does not have a bidding feature. Therefore, to keep
> the assignment?process manageable, I suggest having two officers perform
> this task. Having more involved could slow things down. Those interested
> could let Jonathan know.
>
>
>
> Dietmar
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
>
> From: "Cassidy Sugimoto" <cassidysugimoto at gmail.com>
> Cc: "SIG MET" <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 11:20:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
>
> I know we don't want too many evaluation criteria, but I would also like to
> see components for the quality of the methods and the originality of the
> research...(and maybe "importance" or research or some other word for
> assessing contribution or potential to advance knowledge...)? Just my two
> cents--feel free to disregard.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Jonathan Levitt < jonathan at levitt.net >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
> ?
>
> Of the ten potential reviewers, four have accepted (Kevin Boyack, Katherine
> McCain, Ronald Roussueau and Mike Thelwall), three declined and three have
> not yet replied.
>
> ?
>
> I suggest that we finalise the reviewing criteria well before the deadline.
> ? On the basis of previous discussions, I suggest in addition to the default
> criteria (Overall evaluation, -3 to 3;
>
> Reviewer confidence, 0 to 4) we have the following criteria:
>
> (1) ????? Potential for publication (1 to 5).
>
> (2) ????? Quality of the writing (1 to 5).
>
> (3) ????? Comments on potential for publication and quality of writing.
>
> ?
>
> As the reviewers prefer an absolute score, I suggest we go for it. ? We
> don?t have anyone to normalise, but hopefully the results will not be too
> skewed by not normalising.
>
> ?
>
> I have two questions:
>
> (a) ?????? How are the papers assigned to reviewers?
>
> (b) ????? Is there any way of making sure that ?? reviewers receive their
> papers ASAP.
>
> ?
>
> Judit wrote ?I am not sure, but I think that there is a way to send the
> scores to the authors - Chaoqun can probably test this.? ? ? Chaoqun could
> you please find out and also how many papers have already been submitted.
>
> ?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Jonathan.
> ?
> ?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sigmet-officers mailing list
> Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
> http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
>
>
>
>
> --
> Cassidy R. Sugimoto, PhD
> Assistant Professor
> School of Library and Information Science
> Indiana University Bloomington
> http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~sugimoto
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sigmet-officers mailing list
> Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
> http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://mail.asis.org/pipermail/sigmet-officers/attachments/20110331/57aa6c41/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 08:57:59 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Jonathan Levitt <jonathan at levitt.net>
> Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
> To: SIG MET <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
> Message-ID: <149506.50757.qm at web1210.biz.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Hi,
> ?
> Thanks Dietmar for your suggestions.? I have given my feedback on Cassidy?s
> suggestion in my last posting.? However I can amplify.? For ISSI I found it
> hard to assess the originality of a submission outside my core area (on on
> Web link analysis).? For my part I would not like to undertake additional
> work that is not central to our remit.? But, given that both you and Cassidy
> want additional criteria, I am content to include them, provided that
> reviewers could choose not to score for these additional criteria.? Is this
> possible??
> ?
> Could you pleases clarify what is a bidding feature?? It is important for
> things to movie quickly, especially as one reviewer has asked to be sent the
> papers as early as possible.? I agree that we need twp officers to be
> involved in this process, and volunteer to be one of these officers.? Could
> someone else who will give this matter high priority please volunteer to
> join me in this process?
> ?
> Thanks,
> Jonathan.
>
> --- On Thu, 31/3/11, Dietmar Wolfram <dwolfram at uwm.edu> wrote:
>
>
> From: Dietmar Wolfram <dwolfram at uwm.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
> To: "Cassidy Sugimoto" <cassidysugimoto at gmail.com>
> Cc: "SIG MET" <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
> Date: Thursday, 31 March, 2011, 14:19
>
>
>
> #yiv993792492 p {margin:0;}
>
>
> I also like the idea of including criteria for quality and originality.
> ?
> It looks like EasyChair does not have a bidding feature. Therefore, to keep
> the assignment?process manageable, I suggest having two officers perform
> this task. Having more involved could slow things down. Those interested
> could let Jonathan know.
> ?
> Dietmar
>
>
>
>
>
> From: "Cassidy Sugimoto" <cassidysugimoto at gmail.com>
> Cc: "SIG MET" <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 11:20:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
>
> I know we don't want too many evaluation criteria, but I would also like to
> see components for the quality of the methods and the originality of the
> research...(and maybe "importance" or research or some other word for
> assessing contribution or potential to advance knowledge...)? Just my two
> cents--feel free to disregard.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Jonathan Levitt <jonathan at levitt.net>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Dear all,
> ?
> Of the ten potential reviewers, four have accepted (Kevin Boyack, Katherine
> McCain, Ronald Roussueau and Mike Thelwall), three declined and three have
> not yet replied.
> ?
> I suggest that we finalise the reviewing criteria well before the deadline.
> ?On the basis of previous discussions, I suggest in addition to the default
> criteria (Overall evaluation, -3 to 3;
> Reviewer confidence, 0 to 4) we have the following criteria:
> (1)????? Potential for publication (1 to 5).
> (2)????? Quality of the writing (1 to 5).
> (3)????? Comments on potential for publication and quality of writing.
> ?
> As the reviewers prefer an absolute score, I suggest we go for it.? We
> don?t have anyone to normalise, but hopefully the results will not be too
> skewed by not normalising.
> ?
> I have two questions:
> (a)?????? How are the papers assigned to reviewers?
> (b)????? Is there any way of making sure that ??reviewers receive their
> papers ASAP.
> ?
> Judit wrote ?I am not sure, but I think that there is a way to send the
> scores to the authors - Chaoqun can probably test this.?? ?Chaoqun could you
> please find out and also how many papers have already been submitted.
> ?
> Best regards,
> Jonathan.
> ?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sigmet-officers mailing list
> Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
> http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
>
>
>
>
> --
> Cassidy R. Sugimoto, PhD
> Assistant Professor
> School of Library and Information Science
> Indiana University Bloomington
> http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~sugimoto
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sigmet-officers mailing list
> Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
> http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
>
> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sigmet-officers mailing list
> Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
> http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://mail.asis.org/pipermail/sigmet-officers/attachments/20110331/c5729ac6/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 12:49:59 -0500 (CDT)
> From: Dietmar Wolfram <dwolfram at uwm.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
> To: Jonathan Levitt <jonathan at levitt.net>
> Cc: SIG MET <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
> Message-ID:
>        <
> 1987307328.38308.1301593799014.JavaMail.root at mail01.pantherlink.uwm.edu>
>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>
>
> I don't know if some criteria may be left blank. If originality
> assessment?might be problematic , then perhaps a criterion that addresses
> the significance of the research problem could be used instead. You could
> have two well-crafted submissions-- but if one is on an interesting and
> novel topic and the other is on a perennial topic that has been studied to
> death, it would be nice to acknowledge the submission that makes the larger
> contribution.
>
>
>
> A bidding feature on a conference submission system allows reviewers to?see
> submission?abstracts and then indicate which of the submissions they would
> be interested in reviewing.?Assignments are then based on the?expressed
> interest. ?I'd be willing to join you in assigning the submissions to
> reviewers if no one else has done so already.
>
>
>
> Dietmar
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
>
> From: "Jonathan Levitt" <jonathan at levitt.net>
> To: "SIG MET" <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
> Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2011 10:57:59 AM
> Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>
> ?
>
>
> Thanks Dietmar for your suggestions. ? I have given my feedback on
> Cassidy?s suggestion in my last posting. ? However I can amplify. ? For ISSI
> I found it hard to assess the originality of a submission outside my core
> area (on on Web link analysis). ? For my part I would not like to undertake
> additional work that is not central to our remit. ? But, given that both you
> and Cassidy want additional criteria, I am content to include them, provided
> that reviewers could choose not to score for these additional criteria. ? Is
> this possible? ?
>
>
> ?
>
>
> Could you pleases clarify what is a bidding feature? ? It is important for
> things to movie quickly, especially as one reviewer has asked to be sent the
> papers as early as possible. ? I agree that we need twp officers to be
> involved in this process, and volunteer to be one of these officers. ? Could
> someone else who will give this matter high priority please volunteer to
> join me in this process?
>
>
> ?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> Jonathan.
>
>
> --- On Thu, 31/3/11, Dietmar Wolfram <dwolfram at uwm.edu> wrote:
>
>
>
> From: Dietmar Wolfram <dwolfram at uwm.edu>
> Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
> To: "Cassidy Sugimoto" <cassidysugimoto at gmail.com>
> Cc: "SIG MET" <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
> Date: Thursday, 31 March, 2011, 14:19
>
>
>
>
> I also like the idea of including criteria for quality and originality.
> ?
> It looks like EasyChair does not have a bidding feature. Therefore, to keep
> the assignment?process manageable, I suggest having two officers perform
> this task. Having more involved could slow things down. Those interested
> could let Jonathan know.
> ?
> Dietmar
>
>
>
>
> From: "Cassidy Sugimoto" <cassidysugimoto at gmail.com>
> Cc: "SIG MET" <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 11:20:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
>
> I know we don't want too many evaluation criteria, but I would also like to
> see components for the quality of the methods and the originality of the
> research...(and maybe "importance" or research or some other word for
> assessing contribution or potential to advance knowledge...)? Just my two
> cents--feel free to disregard.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Jonathan Levitt < jonathan at levitt.net >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
>
> ?
>
>
> Of the ten potential reviewers, four have accepted (Kevin Boyack, Katherine
> McCain, Ronald Roussueau and Mike Thelwall), three declined and three have
> not yet replied.
>
>
> ?
>
>
> I suggest that we finalise the reviewing criteria well before the deadline.
> ? On the basis of previous discussions, I suggest in addition to the default
> criteria (Overall evaluation, -3 to 3;
>
>
> Reviewer confidence, 0 to 4) we have the following criteria:
>
>
> (1) ????? Potential for publication (1 to 5).
>
>
> (2) ????? Quality of the writing (1 to 5).
>
>
> (3) ????? Comments on potential for publication and quality of writing.
>
>
> ?
>
>
> As the reviewers prefer an absolute score, I suggest we go for it. ? We
> don?t have anyone to normalise, but hopefully the results will not be too
> skewed by not normalising.
>
>
> ?
>
>
> I have two questions:
>
>
> (a) ?????? How are the papers assigned to reviewers?
>
>
> (b) ????? Is there any way of making sure that ?? reviewers receive their
> papers ASAP.
>
>
> ?
>
>
> Judit wrote ?I am not sure, but I think that there is a way to send the
> scores to the authors - Chaoqun can probably test this.? ? ? Chaoqun could
> you please find out and also how many papers have already been submitted.
>
>
> ?
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Jonathan.
> ?
> ?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sigmet-officers mailing list
> Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
> http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
>
>
>
>
> --
> Cassidy R. Sugimoto, PhD
> Assistant Professor
> School of Library and Information Science
> Indiana University Bloomington
> http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~sugimoto
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sigmet-officers mailing list
> Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
> http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
>
>
>
>
>
> From: "Cassidy Sugimoto" <cassidysugimoto at gmail.com>
> Cc: "SIG MET" <sigmet-officers at asis.org>
> Sent: Wednesday, March 30, 2011 11:20:56 PM
> Subject: Re: [Sigmet-officers] Update on the paper contest
>
> I know we don't want too many evaluation criteria, but I would also like to
> see components for the quality of the methods and the originality of the
> research...(and maybe "importance" or research or some other word for
> assessing contribution or potential to advance knowledge...)? Just my two
> cents--feel free to disregard.
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 3:56 PM, Jonathan Levitt < jonathan at levitt.net >
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Dear all,
>
>
> ?
>
>
> Of the ten potential reviewers, four have accepted (Kevin Boyack, Katherine
> McCain, Ronald Roussueau and Mike Thelwall), three declined and three have
> not yet replied.
>
>
> ?
>
>
> I suggest that we finalise the reviewing criteria well before the deadline.
> ? On the basis of previous discussions, I suggest in addition to the default
> criteria (Overall evaluation, -3 to 3;
>
>
> Reviewer confidence, 0 to 4) we have the following criteria:
>
>
> (1) ????? Potential for publication (1 to 5).
>
>
> (2) ????? Quality of the writing (1 to 5).
>
>
> (3) ????? Comments on potential for publication and quality of writing.
>
>
> ?
>
>
> As the reviewers prefer an absolute score, I suggest we go for it. ? We
> don?t have anyone to normalise, but hopefully the results will not be too
> skewed by not normalising.
>
>
> ?
>
>
> I have two questions:
>
>
> (a) ?????? How are the papers assigned to reviewers?
>
>
> (b) ????? Is there any way of making sure that ?? reviewers receive their
> papers ASAP.
>
>
> ?
>
>
> Judit wrote ?I am not sure, but I think that there is a way to send the
> scores to the authors - Chaoqun can probably test this.? ? ? Chaoqun could
> you please find out and also how many papers have already been submitted.
>
>
> ?
>
>
> Best regards,
>
>
> Jonathan.
> ?
> ?
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sigmet-officers mailing list
> Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
> http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
>
>
>
>
> --
> Cassidy R. Sugimoto, PhD
> Assistant Professor
> School of Library and Information Science
> Indiana University Bloomington
> http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~sugimoto
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sigmet-officers mailing list
> Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
> http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
>
> -----Inline Attachment Follows-----
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sigmet-officers mailing list
> Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
> http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sigmet-officers mailing list
> Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
> http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://mail.asis.org/pipermail/sigmet-officers/attachments/20110331/1e6b88d9/attachment.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sigmet-officers mailing list
> Sigmet-officers at mail.asis.org
> http://mail.asis.org/mailman/listinfo/sigmet-officers
>
>
> End of Sigmet-officers Digest, Vol 5, Issue 33
> **********************************************
>

-- 
Judit Bar-Ilan
Head of Department
Department of Information Science
Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan, 52900, Israel
Tel: 972-3-5318351 Fax: 972-3-7384027
email: barilaj at mail.biu.ac.il
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.asis.org/pipermail/sigmet-officers/attachments/20110331/b56c8322/attachment.html 