Dear DRS mail list
My position coincides with Ken Friedman's; we benefit from responses of
appropriate length and seriousness as befits the topics.
Phil Roberts
>There seem to be different views about the length of a post to the DRS list.
>
>It's been my view that DRS might be a place for serious notes and
>well-crafted essays as well as a place for brief queries, comments and
>statements of opinion.
>
>Some years back, the publishing venues of interesting research societies
>were different than today's journals. They were not the research journals
>common today, with peer review and lengthy delays in publishing. Members
>and correspondents would report, respond, and interact freely. If one
>belonged to the society, one simply took part.
>
>In response to the thread on theory in design, I wrote a number of lengthy
>posts and responses. These were not quick throwaway notes. Each involved
>research, writing, editing, and rewriting. I thought the subjects at hand
>deserved the effort. I've had interesting private responses, but I note
>comments to the list suggesting that DRS isn't the place for this kind of
>post.
>
>I would welcome the views of other subscribers on this issue.
>
>Do most readers of DRS list feel that we should restrict ourselves to short
>notes and responses or statements of opinion, saving lengthier reports and
>responses for journal and monograph publication?
>
>Or is this a forum in which there is also room for longer replies and
comments?
>
>Ken Friedman
>
>
>
>
>
>
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|