March 9, 2009 at 7:29 am
Steve Jones - Editor (3/6/2009)
Hey, we posted the same time. Thanks for the great complement. I appreciate that.On the experts exchange, I've resisted that, but I think there might be some value there. I participate (sometimes) on the MVP newsgroups, and those are better places to discuss things. With experts only, it's a rigorous, and low-noise debate.
If there was enough interest, I suppose I could set up some "experts only", invitation only groups here. Anyone want to start a thread for that?
I hestitate to support that. I prefer open forums. I am elitist, but in a populist manner.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
March 9, 2009 at 7:38 am
Steve Jones - Editor (3/7/2009)
Take it to PASS and it would be great for them to review stuff that is published elsewhere.I don't want to get too much editorial stuff here. We like the low bar, encouraging people to publish that might not do it at SQL Mag, SimpleTalk, etc.
I don't think Gail was suggesting heavy editing, just a place where you can place an article and have a little peer review prior to submitting it to SSC officially. I don't think it would be required, but an option for authors who may not be confident that they have presented the subject accurately or appropriately.
I do think it is a good service for PASS to offer.
Jack Corbett
Consultant - Straight Path Solutions
Check out these links on how to get faster and more accurate answers:
Forum Etiquette: How to post data/code on a forum to get the best help
Need an Answer? Actually, No ... You Need a Question
March 9, 2009 at 7:41 am
The idea of a pre-publication spot for article preview is good. I've usually sent my rough drafts around to a few folks for the few articles I've written, and that's been a useful thing.
On the other hand, the critique in the discussion once something is published is a major part of the fun of publishing. I learned a lot from the responses to my Audit Logs articles. I think my Hybrid Hierarchy article didn't have the general interest necessary to spark much of a discussion, but it was still good to see the responses to it.
An opportunity to have an article reviewed by experts might be something new writers would welcome. Might be best to ask the next ten or twenty people who send in articles if they'd like it reviewed before publication. That would give a good bit of insite into the need for such a service. Maybe an editorial on the subject, mainly looking for "Would the chance to get your proposed article reviewed by local experts encourage you to write, or discourage it?" Get responses that way.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
March 9, 2009 at 8:28 am
Hey Gail and Steve,
Please understand, I wasn't suggesting anything as strenuous as the peer review my friend has to go through. I was just trying to draw an analogy to support the idea that substance is best reviewed in advance of publication. I read Steve's comment and completely understand his wanting to support and encourage authorship. All that's needed is a quick look to see if what the author is suggesting is a bad practice, or just needs some polish. You guys could tell them that in private and let them fix it before they publish.
I think this is important for two reasons. First, because I recently criticized the technique used in an article, and then felt bad for the author because they had put a lot of work into it and I was part of the crowd calling their baby ugly. I hope the experience doesn't discourage the author from publishing again, because he wrote and illustrated it well.
Secondly, whether you mean for it to or not, publishing an article is on this site really is an endorsement of it. It adds whatever credibility is associated with SSC to that article, sort of like calling it a best practice. Someone searches and finds it, never looks at the discussion, and thinks "Great, that's how you do it."
I'm not saying that all the articles have to be cutting edge. Just make sure they aren't promoting things you know to be bad. If you catch them using a while loop or something like that inappropriately, just point them towards the better way to do it and encourage them to make the correction and then put it out there.
That's my long-winded way of saying I agree with you. 😉
__________________________________________________
Against stupidity the gods themselves contend in vain. -- Friedrich Schiller
Stop, children, what's that sound? Everybody look what's going down. -- Stephen Stills
March 9, 2009 at 1:37 pm
george sibbald (3/7/2009)
t.walker (3/6/2009)
I really support that idea. I think a more private invited members forum would enable me to speak more freely/Although I am a rookie here, I am also a Microsoft Gold partner for SQL Server!
Since I am only a rookie, how about one of the 'old timers' starts the thread!
absolutely not. As an average Joe who does still try to contribute where I can, I don't see why I should be disbarred from some parts of this site. I don't think that is steve's intention for the ethos of this site.
If you want to discourse with only those whom you see to be your peers I am sure there are other outlets for that.
The best on this site are free to discuss on this site at any time, the knowledge that anyone could read it will help them ensure they post accurately and without disparaging people. Its educational for the rest of us and sometimes entertaining too!
I totally agree. I do not post the most or even the best suggestions on an issue, but I try to help where I can. I also obtain a great deal more information on a topic than I can most times provide. How do you rate who is your peer? I would hate to see what is deemed an elitist group amongst the people on this site, I feel it would defeat the purporse of an open forum. I learn from everyone and I know who are the most trusted providers of solutions. I truly look up to them but that's MY choice. Not some tag that 99 of 100 people may apply to the poster. It's MY discretion. Come around often enough and you'll know where the tag "expert" or "guru" truly applies. At least I do.
-- You can't be late until you show up.
March 9, 2009 at 10:03 pm
It's hard to lightly edit and help someone. It takes a lot of work. Most editors get fiarly heavy handed, pushing the work to be more standard and taking the author's voice.
I try to suggest authors to get a friend, preferably a less experienced friend, to reead the article and give comments. Let them know if it makes sense, if they can learn.
I think peer review is great, but it's hard to sustain. Many experts get tired or reading poorly written articles over time. Kind of like answering the same posts again and again. An author's best chance is to have a good set of friends that they won't overwhelm with their articles.
March 10, 2009 at 6:45 pm
I like the way this thread has developed because my objective is to be able to find authorititive material rather than to feel I'm a member of a group of bright people. I'm just a Joe who wants to do my job well with the right information at the end of the day. Absolutely not someone who thinks he is an 'elitest' SQL expert.
It's easy to confuse editing, reviewing, and just looking over some material. The previous posts are referring to all of these.
If you EDIT something, as Steve does every day, I think you put your name in the authors box and it has to be spot on. I have a document I took on from another author last week that I now own. Although the content was 80% accurate it was seriously incomplete and I am rewriting the whole thing because I'm not happy with it, it's not up to my standards. LOTS OF WORK TO DO.
If you REVIEW something (this is hard to do well) I think you are looking at whether the content is ACCURATE and whether it is UNDERSTANDABLE. You are not looking to see whether you agree with it's slant, whether it is phrased as you would have phrased it. You stand back from it a little and see whether it stands up as someone elses document. If not, you critique it and pass it back.
I think though, that what is being suggested here is 'the quick look'. Example: I'm particularly interested in fragmentation of all kinds and I feel I could write a good article about it. However, it would certainly be useful if one of the experienced posters read it and said 'Love the article Tim, except that paragraphs 3 to 5 look like pants, do you want to reconsider what you wrote.'
Tim
.
March 11, 2009 at 6:49 am
I'm willing to help with any of those three (that Tim outlined above). Just so long as it doesn't turn into a full-time job on its own (since I don't currently have time for that). I have proofreading and editing experience and, I think, more than a little SQL knowledge.
- Gus "GSquared", RSVP, OODA, MAP, NMVP, FAQ, SAT, SQL, DNA, RNA, UOI, IOU, AM, PM, AD, BC, BCE, USA, UN, CF, ROFL, LOL, ETC
Property of The Thread
"Nobody knows the age of the human race, but everyone agrees it's old enough to know better." - Anon
Viewing 8 posts - 46 through 53 (of 53 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply