From: mdhangton@gmail.com   
      
   On Saturday, June 7, 2014 9:13:44 AM UTC-4, C. E. Gee wrote:   
   >    
   >    
   > In the scientific community, peer review is standard procedure.   
   >    
   > Self-published works of fiction that have not been approved by a neutral   
   editor/publisher should be viewed with the same disdain as some of the    
   scientific theories advanced by unqualified crackpots.  That is to say,   
   sometimes laughable, but certainly    
   not "real" science.   
   >    
      
   I was involved with Porous Silicon Carbide a little bit, which was like   
   Polywater or Cold Fusion except a much smaller deal, so I know the politics of   
   that sort of thing, and I've had the guy who invented it shout at me over the   
   phone.  And he put my    
   name as ninth out of ten on the masthead of an MRS report for several months   
   of pointless work without my permission for which I will be eternally   
   disinterested.  What passes for peer review at the Materials Research Society   
   meetings they have in Boston    
   every second year is the section chairmen select 3 attendees at random (what I   
   mean is that they probably won't be people who have the same specialty and can   
   understand a lot about what they're reading) who scan over the manuscripts in   
   their hotel rooms    
   for 10 minutes, and maybe say the references are in the wrong format or   
   something.  And he wasn't an unqualified crackpot; he just sold an idea to   
   some funding agencies that was geometrically impossible and everybody else   
   knew it, but afterward everybody    
   followed the money, and a lot of time and resources were spent on nonsense.   
      
   Now, I could write about some of the other situations where peer review works   
   poorly (which I deleted just now), but I don't care to because some of these   
   guys will bash me again.  But I'll tell you that it's not without its flaws   
   either.   
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
      
        
      
   >    
   >    
   > I follow the "Science Fiction Writing" page on Faceback.  The moderator of   
   that group is swamped with ads for "self published" fiction.  These self   
   published author types are a real problem.   
   >    
   >    
   >    
   > Most of their writing is absolute drek.  But, for some reason, they don't   
   seem to understand that.  That's why peer review is so important.     
   >    
   >    
   >    
   > Now, I have a self-published short work of SF in my blog.  But it's a joke!    
   It really is a joke, and I haven't promoted it in any way except  as a joke.   
   >    
   >    
   >    
   > And sometime soon I'm going to put an "OFT REJECTED" story in my blog.  But   
   I have no intention to promote it.  In fact, I'll preface said story with an   
   explanation as to why the story was rejected so many times, and I'll also   
   apologize to my readers    
   for subjecting them to such a work.   
   >    
   >    
   >    
   > Now, I'm going to make another apology here.  Forgive me for saying this if   
   you're a critic, editor, or publisher.   
   >    
   >    
   >    
   > When I say "peer review," I mean peer review.  For it's been my observation   
   that many editors, critics, publishers, are in actuality, writers.  But   
   they're often too undisciplined or laid back to write much.  So they pour over   
   other writers works.  And    
   in my communications with editors, critics, publishers, they may be a bit   
   lazier than "other writers," but they always seem to me to be highly   
   intelligent. Thus, when they approve or reject some work, it means something.   
   >    
   >    
   >    
   > Just sayin'   
   >    
   >    
   >    
   > C.E. Gee   
   >    
   >    
   >    
   > http://www.kinzuakid.blogspot.com   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)