garrett said:
... I think the paper-journal system is antiquated. Have you ever read Paul Ginsparg's manifesto?
http://people.ccmr.cornell.edu/~ginsparg/blurb/pg02pr.html
I found it inspirational. As far as I recall (and I may have it wrong), he says researchers should post papers to an unmoderated forum, then others should pick the papers they like from there to make collections. Essentially, journals would be replaced by lists of preprints collected by interested parties -- having your paper selected by a respected body of collectors would grant the same prestige and readership as journal publication currently does.
...
Ginsparg's idea seems brilliant and quite sound, in your paraphrase. I haven't read his manifesto or thought about it.
I haven't quite got what it takes to fill the role of selective internet lister----that you describe----but I do have some of the impulses and tendencies that would suit someone for that role.
people who traditionally assemble and edit POETRY ANTHOLOGIES do this kind of thing-----they actually present their own vision of a field and where it is going by selecting out a collection that embodies that vision.
and they also are a kind of historian (a visionary to be good must also be a creative historian)
since LINKS are even more compact than poems, the process of compiling a link anthology would be even more efficient than that of compiling a poetry anthology.
One would probably want to append comments.
John Baez is to some extent a part-time anthologizer, with very good notes and comments. Ginsparg might have been thinking of him.
Maybe all we need to do is wait until some of these guys like
John Baez get OLD and no longer aspire to do their own original work and discover what the universe is etc etc. Then they can compile annotated lists and accumulate huge amounts of prestige and respect because of making such good lists.
And
John Baez can have graduate student SLAVES who can scour the countryside for him looking for links to add to the Baez List. the reputation-driven academic MACHINERY (don't knock it, it accomplishes a lot) would be brought into furthering these lists.
=============
oops, got swept away by the idea. maybe in the wrong direction.
Other Internet Lists I can think of: 't Hooft's personal website with a list of online materials that a young person should study in order to become a good physicist. Must feel good to have one's online lecturenotes included in 't Hooft's list of recommended readings. He includes some fresh frank commentary IIRC
well I can't think of other examples but maybe you or someone else can.
It is a lot of work. To motivate people to do it they should award PhD's for making a good annotated link list (like a thesis). They do that in various academic Literature fields---a thesis can sometimes amount to an anthology with lots of comment interspersed.
My kind of lists are more like spreading salt and sawdust on the ice, to give people traction. It is a preliminary flagging of stuff that might easily slip by and be missed. If someone else finds it useful, great. I almost have to do it, in order to get an idea of what's going on.
==========
about your view of refereed paper, I think I understand your attitude very well. It makes sense given that you have found a good place and way to live. Refereed publication gives people more options of where they can go and which other collections of colleagues they can hang out with in the coffeeroom and at the blackboard. I can believe that you have weighed these considerations carefully and made a wise choice. (there have been several discussions about this and several others feel the same way). Status and mobility options can become obsessions and take on more importance than they are actually worth. If one is already in a place one likes and is happy.
