Re: [CLBP] Participation agreement

Hi!

Sai Emrys writes:
> FYI:
>
> The Conlang Books Project participation agreement final draft is here:
> http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dct5h6zd_27fpwcf6
>...
What are the reasons for the selection of the credit points method?
And is it intended to be this way with all its consequences?

If 100 points are available per book, then there will practicably only
be one primary author and in the presense of a primary author, there
will be max. one co-author.

And if three people write about 1/3 of the content each, then there
will be no primary author (which may be ok).  At maximum, there will
be only three authors (primary or co-), which I find strange if large
portions of the book are written by more people to equal parts.

You could also end up with no author at all, and even quite quickly:
namely if at least four people write the book to equal parts.  (Having
no author is not impossible: scientific conference books often only
have an editor in the main book registration entry, since there are a
lot of authors writing only small portions of the book).

So the more people participate, the less likely major contributors
become co-authors, even if their absolute amount of contribution does
not change.

All this may be intended, I am merely wondering whether the
consequences of the system are well understood.

I am sorry that this is kind of a destructive criticism right now,
because I don't present an alternative system that would work 'better'
from my point of view.

Further, I currently don't want to participate, so my opinion should
be viewed as a small comment. Only my 2¢.

**Henrik

Reply