[Roleplaying] Peer Review of Articles

[Geir-Tore Brenne]

I think you are wrong. Whether its paper or online, does not really  
matter that much anymore, and it has not mattered much for years.  
Nearly all journals have their archive online, and the libraries can  
chose to subscribe only to the online edition. - The peer review  
journals/conferences/book chapters/academic books is neccessary source  
of output, because the whole scientific community is organized towards  
it, as a standard of quality. At my university, peer review is a  
somewhat accepted standard of whhat counts as "scientific". If your  
findings has been peer reviewed, it can be referred to as "science"  
outwards ( I know its simple but its a very practical operational  
definition).

Geir


On Dec 9, 2009, at 12:39 AM, Markus Montola wrote:

>> I think we are in a cultural shift towards interactive experiences  
>> and
>> the older generation can't relate to that. That's why they insist on
>> peer review articles because that's how they can delay the  
>> development
>> of a new cultural elite based in interactive aesthetics and culture.
>
> I think we are in a paradigm shift in terms of academic publishing.
> Paper publications are going obsolete; who reads paper journals  
> anymore?
> Paper books will follow. Instead, we see loads of random internets
> publications ranging from conference proceedings to reports and online
> journals. Still, the system is trying to maintain that Book Chapters  
> Are
> Better Than Conferences, Since Hey, They Are Printed In Real Books  
> After
> All.
>
> And as journals are losing their importance, we are moving towards
> faster and faster cycle of publishing, and many fields are already
> taking steps towards, Publishing 2.0 where the publications are not  
> end
> results, but stuff is published on commentable and even editable  
> forums
> before being finalized.
>
> Sometimes I wonder why don't we all go full speed on Wikipedia  
> approach,
> starting from the people in natural sciences. Except that in  
> collective
> process it's hard to show personal merits -- to  academic
> decision-makers who are basing their measures on pointless metrics  
> that
> are more about gaming the system than publishing kick-ass papers that
> advance the state of art.
>
> Game studies has made me an academic anarchist: To me, only guerilla
> scholarship makes any sense. The formal system is always perfect for
> doing the research that has already been done, but starts to suck the
> moment you start researching something new.
>
> Some people cling to disciplinary divides, while the young generation
> shops for whatever tools that address the task at hand. The word
> "Oxford" is no stamp of quality in my books.
>
>
>  - Markus
>
> PS. Here's a dilemma where old system meets new field: Who would be
> qualified to be an opponent in my defense? Requirements: Doctor,
> preferrably been for a few years. Not a close colleague. Knowledgeable
> on role-playing and pervasive gaming. Multidisciplinary. Preferrably
> European.
>
> If you have a good idea, send me a suggestion IN PRIVATE.
> _______________________________________________
> Roleplaying mailing list
> Roleplaying at digra.org
> http://mail.digra.org/mailman/listinfo/roleplaying