Re: Fire Hydrant for the Flames

First:

<<If we
>had a regular system (say one post on Monday, one post Thursday) that would
>mean two peer reviews a week. Much more managable, in my opinion. It would
>also give three days for comments and exchanges. If more comments are
>necesary, the threads could be easily taken off-list. But I believe that it
>is important to have the threads on-list for a couple of days, so that others
>can comment on the comments. We want open peer review.>>
And then, in a message dated 03/12/02 6:11:16 PM, grey@FAS.HARVARD.EDU writes:

<< People would sign up for a chunk of time (a week), and for any given
chunk of time, there would be 3 (or some other suitable number) people who
would be responsible for providing careful critiques of any language
presented during that week. This way, people who aren't quite ready
wouldn't have to wait 6 months to get comments. If we did things this way,
I'd say that the first month or so be "staffed" by more people, so that we
could handle the expected rush of people clamoring for comments. >>

    Yeah, I really like this idea.  I say "this", even though it's not
necessarily one, defined idea, because I like the sense of it.  I'd be
willing to participate right away, if someone can hammer down a format.

-David

"Zi hiwejnat zodZaraDatsi pat Zi mirejsat dZaCajani sUlo."
"The future's uncertain and the end is always near."
                --Jim Morrison

Reply