By: Jonathan Rochkind
On the question of ‘blog vs journal’, I’m interested in your comments about your robust peer review process — which I think sounds like is NOT a “double blind” peer review process, it’s an open process...
View ArticleBy: Karl
I’ve never felt more a part of the broader library community than seeing some of my comments relayed here. Thank you again for letting my input matter a little. Many times has this blog renewed my...
View ArticleBy: ellie
You are correct that our peer review is not “double blind.” I actually only just recently found out that it is common practice (in the sciences at least) for authors to suggest appropriate reviewers...
View ArticleBy: Brett Bonfield
It's probably worth adding that our peer review process was <a href="http://www.inthelibrarywiththeleadpipe.org/2009/so-you-want-to-write-about-libraries/" rel="nofollow">inspired by the Code4Lib...
View ArticleBy: Jonathan Rochkind
yeah, I wouldn’t suggest you should ONLY offer a feed that requires you to click through for full text. (some people do that when they want to force users to come to the original website to read the...
View ArticleBy: Ellie
I would say there are two main ways we get our content. 1) We write it. The majority of the editors (myself excluded) are in the regular writing rotation. 2) We recruit it. Most of our guest authors...
View Article
More Pages to Explore .....