|
From: | Marco Roos |
Subject: | Re: [Myexperiment-discuss] myExperiment policy about negative comments |
Date: | Thu, 23 Oct 2008 10:11:42 +0200 |
User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (Windows/20080914) |
Hello Giovanni, You raise an important point, especially because I think myExperiment needs negative (but not destructive) comments to mature. For example, my first workflow on myExperiment had serious flaws that a reviewer rightly spotted when we submitted a paper about it. The paper did not make it. If the workflow had had negative comments, I would have submitted a better paper. Ultimately, only positive comments will not help anyone. NB the review reports I got were very constructive, I would have had no objection if these would have been 'negative' comments on myExperiment. Which does make me think: myExperiment developers, can you link comments/ratings to /versions/ of workflows, because naturally I improved the workflow in response to the reviews? >From what I've seen on the net in forums and shopping sites, it is all about the tone of the comments. It is quite possible to bring forward constructive negative comments. As myExperiment matures, I would like when moderators could remove destructive comments and block destructive commenters. Also, I think we should see what the new generation of scientists, brought up on blog- and online shopping sites, will make of myExperiment. Additionally, I've been an advocate of additional expert rating on myExperiment. This is common on shopping sites, and would be reminiscent of peer review. This may add credibility for some users of myExperiment, but perhaps more importantly add creditability for the traditional scientific community. I imagine selected experts would be asked to review workflows (or packs of scientific research objects). This could be anonymous, addressing the problem you raised. On a still young site like myExperiment, it may also get the rating system started. As for your angry scientists scenario's: they are true, but I don't think this can be solved completely. I happens in anonymous peer review just the same. We generally guess who is refereeing, don't we? In the user ratings everything is out in the open, so a notorious foul commenter would be visible too. What about rating raters? ;-) Hope my two cents help, Marco. Giovanni Marco Dall'Olio wrote:
-- Marco Roos Faculty of Science University of Amsterdam Kruislaan 403, room F1.02 1098 SJ Amsterdam tel. +31 (0) 20 525 7522 http://home.medewerker.uva.nl/m.roos1 (includes links to social networks) Note the change of e-mail address to address@hidden |
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |