Dear Guy and colleagues,
First, Guy, thanks for sending this around. ( http://www.cra.org/Activities/snowbird/2006/bestavros.pdf ) I had seen the slides before but reread them and I find they are a good description of the problems that we, also in TC6, face.
(I just wrote Jorg asking if there is a record of the conclusions, if any, reached by the panel. If I receive something I will send it on.)
What to do? One idea we might try at some of our conferences is what used to be the practice at ITC conferences. I am not sure what their- practice is today but many years ago only a few papers were presented by their authors. The rest were summarized by a recognized expert in the field. In my experience these experts did a better job explaining the papers' significance than the authors would likely have done. (And one of the papers summarized was one of my own!) Authors, knowing that their accepted papers were going to be further and publicly evaluated, might be more careful in what they submit. Our TC6 meetings might obtain a better reputation, too.
With best regards all around, Harry
Guy Leduc wrote:
Hi all,
Jorg Liebeheer has circulated this on the IEEE Comsoc TCCC list recently.
I recommend reading Azer Bestavros's slides on "Deconstructing the Current Models of CS publications".