I’ve only just noticed – the latest Carnival of the Cats arrived on Sunday. So toddle on over there for all your moggie magic!
So good, even the Beast is letting me blog tonight!
Bob – are you familiar with Henry Beard’s Poetry for Cats ? I think you’d like it.
I wasn’t familiar with it, but it’s now on my Amazon wish list.
Oh, and thanks for the delivery of snow you sent us! It’s much appreciated by everyone except the bus drivers.
Ah, so that’s where it went. We had super snow for two days, but now it’s fading fast. My kids are disappointed, but I shall console them with the knowledge that it’s gone to Finland.
Just wanted to add that I read your letter to the editor and agree with your conclusion. One drawback, though, is that like for open access, I am afraid that mostly new journals will adopt these new review possibilities. I want to publish in a journal that my peers already read. So my choices are actually slightly more limited than they appear, if my work is worthwhile. That is, it’s easy enough to get published. I actually would like to have the paper as widely read as possible!
Do you think PLoS would have had more success if their editorial model was only double-blind?
Heather – I have to admit I’ve no idea. Perhaps not, because they were also pushing another innovation at the same time. I think moving to double-blind reviewing would work better for “average” journals trying to gain an advantage by being slightly different – it’s a selling point that is easier to achieve than “we get reviews done quickly”.