Is a reading room a good idea for the Elsmar Cove?

Here's my two shillings worth:

Submit professional group and individual stand alone “white papers”, “articles” and “pre publication drafts” for peer critique and discussion, relating to Business thinking, quality systems and processes.

Wallace.

Craig is the moderator - Please let me know what you folks want as the forum description. I would also like a description of the 'constraints' (what type of document can be posted here, and by whom {do we want this forum to be a 'moderated post' forum where each post is held until reviewed and approved by forum moderator defined criteria that Craig can go by.

Let's agree on the 'compliance' (submission / acceptance) criteria.

This can then be a 'sticky' thread so that people know the 'forum submission rules'.

Marc said:

Craig is the moderator - Please let me know what you folks want as the forum description. I would also like a description of the 'constraints' (what type of document can be posted here, and by whom {do we want this forum to be a 'moderated post' forum where each post is held until reviewed and approved by forum moderator defined criteria that Craig can go by.

Let's agree on the 'compliance' (submission / acceptance) criteria.

This can then be a 'sticky' thread so that people know the 'forum submission rules'.

Click to expand...

Here's my input:
Wallace.

The reading room

Forum description

Draft publications, document and information sharing

Description of constraints

Thread and posted information shall relate to Business, Quality, Safety and Environment systems and process issues contained throughout the Cove forums and web site

Copyright documents shall not be posted unless permission is granted
Original authors, publishers, groups and individuals, may post

Draft: Submission/acceptance criteria

All information submitted to the reading room shall, relate to Business, Quality, Safety and Environment systems and process issues contained throughout the Cove forums and web site

The approval process shall consist of designated and named cove members assessing publications and documents for suitability, copyright and legal issues

A consensus shall be reached before approval

Upon approval, the document author and/or submitter, shall be informed of acceptance or decline reasons

OK - Craig is the moderator. I want him to weigh in on this. Also - do we want more than Draft publications, document and information sharing for the forum description?

Marc said:

OK - Craig is the moderator. I want him to weigh in on this. Also - do we want more than Draft publications, document and information sharing for the forum description?

Click to expand...

It's just my take FWIW yet, I would think that, the reading room would have a broad scope of use.
Wallace.

Wallace, I generally like your description, but I do have a couple of questions for everyone.

First, how can we be sure that a particular piece has not been copyrighted? Do we need to do anything other than restating the Cove policy in the reading room submission rules?

Second, I like the idea of a peer review process, but can we get people to agree to do it? How do we decide who is elgible to be a "peer"? I think that possibly a Karma threshold might work. Whatever we do, I would like to see the peer review process offer excellent feedback, while taking no more than 2 or 3 days, at most. The short turnaround would make the Cove very attractive, I think.

Finally, has any thought been given to the relationship between these threads and the monthly submissions? What is the difference as far as objectives go?

Very good discussion so far...

Craig H. said:

First, how can we be sure that a particular piece has not been copyrighted? Do we need to do anything other than restating the Cove policy in the reading room submission rules?

Click to expand...

I guess we'll have to trust and verify on this one yet, it can be rather difficult to verify author authenticity at times, without getting into plagiarism issues.
I believe that, asking all submitters to read and agree to submission rules is the best we can do.

Craig H. said:

Second, I like the idea of a peer review process, but can we get people to agree to do it? How do we decide who is eligible to be a "peer"? I think that possibly a Karma threshold might work. Whatever we do, I would like to see the peer review process offer excellent feedback, while taking no more than 2 or 3 days, at most. The short turnaround would make the Cove very attractive, I think.

Click to expand...

Choosing peers to review may be easy at the Cove yet, I have to say; Karma may be misleading regarding ability. I liken Karma to seniority and, personally I have a problem with the notion of seniority, however, I do accept the fact that one has to serve a kind of apprenticeship at the Cove before receiving some form of peer recognition. Seniority though is no substitute for ability.


I believe monthly submissions may be measured through the web site stats.


Wallace.

RE: Library

Jennifer Kirley said:

We might call it The Library. Or The Media Center. I like The Reading Room very much too.

Click to expand...

Team;

I think that having such material will add to the value of this forum. I also like the names suggested so far but would also like to throw in 'Knowledge Center' for consideration.

We call our information sharing platform "knowledge base" - reading room sounds very much like ORA FOIA

But the most important thing is that THE COVE IS BACK!!! :

Great idead, the copyright issues will definitely need policing though...