[SFRA-L] The future of the SFRA Review

[Rob Latham]

This sort of print or electronic option is becoming standard with many  
journals, which simply can't keep pace with the increase in postal  
costs.


>
> I agree with what Bruce said: a printed version, if possible, should  
> be an option, for the members who want it (this could mean paying  
> more for it, I would think), along with an electronic version.
> Warren
>
> Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2011 11:22 AM
> To: Karen Hellekson; SFRA-L
> Subject: Re: [SFRA-L] The future of the SFRA Review
>
> I agree with Karen's points. I think having a printed version  
> available as an option, or as a pdf that could be printed two sided  
> in a complete edition in a uniform format would make the review more  
> credible for tenure and promotion purposes, and if possible having  
> printed editions for library subscriptions where the library  
> continues to have hard copy formats in its archive makes sense. I  
> recall an Australian SF about rebuilding civilizations after an  
> incident with satellites wipes out all electronic data bases, so  
> only things left in printed form (at that point very few)  
> remain.....  I am away from my office this summer so only  
> sporadically following this thread, but I appreciate all the work  
> that has gone into maintaining SFRA Review over the years and hope  
> we can reach a solution that is affordable, practical, and preserves  
> a record of all the work people put into it. Take care.
>
> Bruce Rockwood
>
> "When Dwight Eisenhower as the new president of Columbia University  
> in the 1950s was introduced to the senior faculty, he remarked how  
> pleased he was to meet with the employees of the university. The  
> physicist I.I. Rabi interrupted him: 'Mr. President,' he said, 'we  
> are not the employees of the university. We are the university!'  
> Perceptions were different then. . . . Some intellectuals see these  
> changes in the university as a decline of the higher culture. Others  
> see evolution and progress. Which change you see depends,  
> ironically, on how you were educated." -- Heinz Pagels, The Dreams  
> of Reason, pp 37-38 (1988).
> ________________________________________
> From: sfra-l-bounces at charlemagne.cddc.vt.edu [sfra-l-bounces at charlemagne.cddc.vt.edu 
> ] On Behalf Of Karen Hellekson [khellekson at gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 01, 2011 8:18 AM
> To: SFRA-L
> Subject: Re: [SFRA-L] The future of the SFRA Review
>
>> Over the past week, the EC (Lisa, Jason, Susan, Patrick, and I) and  
>> the
>> editors of the Review (Doug and Jason) have been debating what should
>> happen. We've had a LOT of ideas, but we'd very much like to hear  
>> from the
>> membership. We're hoping that a lively and informed debate will  
>> help clarify
>
> I have thoughts! Here they are.
>
> 1. The calls for papers should be online only. They get too old, too
> fast. They should appear on the Drupal Web site, tagged, and one
> person should be in charge of collecting them and updating them
> perhaps once every 2 weeks, with a dedicated cfpsfrareview e-mail
> address to receive e-mailed calls.
>
> 2. I personally would prefer online-only copy with an e-mail to me or
> to the list to tell me when it's out, because only then will I
> remember to go to the site and look at it. I would navigate with
> categories and read what interested me. The HTML-ness of the site
> would make it Google indexable and SFRA would probably get a much
> higher online profile. It would also be possible to include videos,
> images, etc., for real multimedia.
>
> 3. Although that's what I *personally* would prefer, I advocate PDFs
> for two big reasons: (a) so contributors can show something to
> promotion and tenure committees; and (b) for archiving, as Hal Hall
> has pointed out. Also, if SFRA could not afford a print version, or if
> SFRA moves to a "print only if you request it" model, people could
> print out something nicely formatted and readable if they dislike
> reading on screen.
>
> 4. SFRA should explore dual publication: both online and print. There
> is no evidence to indicate that people who can read for free won't
> join, but if you're worried, you could put a brief moratorium on the
> online version, so maybe you could post full HTML text one issue
> behind, to provide print with a window of exclusivity. (Although I
> still advocate putting the PDF up when the issue hits US mailboxes, as
> a courtesy to our overseas members.) If dual pub is a go, then the
> Board ought to explore an open Creative Commons copyright for the
> print version too (the Web site uses CC). Currently it reverts to
> author and we'd have to request permission to reprint online; better
> to let *everyone* reproduce it wherever they like and credit back.
> Authors reposting on their own sites = free advertising for SFRA.
>
> 5. The survey asked about e-reader formats. I can make my own
> e-reader-formatted copy from HTML, so this is not an issue for me, but
> I realize that perhaps not everybody is so Web-savvy. Perhaps one
> thing to explore is making up Kindle versions and selling them on
> Amazon.com for some teeny amount, like .99, and putting the money
> toward the org. YES, people will pay for something they can get for
> free, for sheer convenience.
>
> --
> klh
>
> Karen Hellekson, PhD, ELS
> khellekson at gmail.com
> http://karenhellekson.com/
> _______________________________________________
> SFRA-L mailing list
> SFRA-L at wiz.cath.vt.edu
> http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sfra-l
> _______________________________________________
> SFRA-L mailing list
> SFRA-L at wiz.cath.vt.edu
> http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sfra-l
> _______________________________________________
> SFRA-L mailing list
> SFRA-L at wiz.cath.vt.edu
> http://wiz.cath.vt.edu/mailman/listinfo/sfra-l