<html>
<head>
<style><!--
.hmmessage P
{
margin:0px;
padding:0px
}
body.hmmessage
{
font-size: 10pt;
font-family:Verdana
}
--></style>
</head>
<body class='hmmessage'>
I did<BR> <BR>> From: spa105@york.ac.uk<BR>> To: bonetools@listserv.niif.hu<BR>> Date: Thu, 8 Oct 2009 23:48:07 +0100<BR>> Subject: Re: [Bonetools] (Fwd) Re: nanterre publication<BR>> <BR>> Not me.<BR>> <BR>> S<BR>> <BR>> > Are all of you getting Beth's messages? She says she is getting a message <BR>> > that her letters are bouncing - presumably 'off the mailing list'<BR>> ><BR>> >Alice<BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> >hi Alice,<BR>> ><BR>> >Did this go through? I keep getting a bounce message from the WBRG<BR>> >group but then I wonder if I sent it and it did go through?? Can you<BR>> >forward it on if not. I don't know what is wrong with it??<BR>> ><BR>> >Thanks!<BR>> ><BR>> >beth<BR>> ><BR>> >On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 9:18 AM, Elisabeth Ann Stone<BR>> ><elisabethastone@gmail.com> wrote:<BR>> >> hi Isabelle and all,<BR>> >><BR>> >> I can also help with English and with translation problems from Spanish.<BR>> >><BR>> >> I believe that a hard copy generally still has greater acceptance<BR>> >> among scholars, so I think that is the best option, but we could<BR>> >> explore ways of dually publishing online (perhaps free for members<BR>> >> only or something along those lines would be acceptable to a<BR>> >> publisher) and in hard copy??<BR>> >><BR>> >> best wishes....<BR>> >> Beth<BR>> >><BR>> >><BR>> >><BR>> >><BR>> >> On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 1:06 AM, Alice Choyke <h13017cho@iif.hu> wrote:<BR>> >>> Dear Vivian, =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 If the WBRG meeting in Paris was an <BR>> >>> independent meeting =<BR>> >of interested<BR>> >>> scholars I would, more or less, agree with you. A bi-lingiual volume <BR>> >>> wou=<BR>> >ld<BR>> >>> be only to the good. However, the WBRG is a working group of ICAZ. <BR>> >>> There=<BR>> > has<BR>> >>> been a unstated policy of all ICAZ working groups to publish <BR>> >>> everything submitted after the conference by participants, preferably <BR>> >>> in peer-revie=<BR>> >wed<BR>> >>> format and well-edited. The language, up to now, has been in English <BR>> >>> to insure widest possible dissemination of the information it contains. <BR>> >>> Checking back with members of the executive committee this 'open' and <BR>> >>> 'inclusive' policy has never before been an issue. =A0=A0=A0=A0 BAR <BR>> >>> asks only for a clean camera-ready manuscript and would=<BR>> > not require<BR>> >>> format change on Isabelle's part and it would produce hard-copy. Thus, <BR>> >>> i=<BR>> >f<BR>> >>> the editing of the papers is far advanced it would not require <BR>> >>> anything =<BR>> >more<BR>> >>> than to find someone who can convert word files into whatever <BR>> >>> electronic publishing language. =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 To my mind (sorry to <BR>> >>> repeat myself) the only question=<BR>> > is whether the<BR>> >>> proceedings are published on the Nanterre server electronically or in <BR>> >>> ha=<BR>> >rd<BR>> >>> copy (BAR being the best option). I am happy to write to David <BR>> >>> Davidson =<BR>> >at<BR>> >>> BAR to make sure this is a real option although since the first and <BR>> >>> seco=<BR>> >nd<BR>> >>> proceedings were published by BAR I would be surprised if problems <BR>> >>> cropp=<BR>> >ed<BR>> >>> up. =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 I also suggest that in addition to <BR>> >>> complaining abo=<BR>> >ut this or that in<BR>> >>> the publication we offer Isabelle all help with the English editing <BR>> >>> whic=<BR>> >h<BR>> >>> will move things along much faster if carried out in an expeditious <BR>> >>> fash=<BR>> >ion.<BR>> >>> I raise my hand immediately to offer that help.<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> Best,<BR>> >>> Alice<BR>> >>><BR>> >>> On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 2:16 AM, Vivian Scheinsohn <scheinso@retina.ar><BR>> >>> wrote:<BR>> >>>><BR>> >>>> Dear colleagues As Christian has mentioned we all know how hard and <BR>> >>>> difficult is to=A0e=<BR>> >dit a<BR>> >>>> book. So it is not astounding what happened with the Nanterre <BR>> >>>> publicati=<BR>> >on<BR>> >>>> since, from my own experience, publishers are driven by a logic that <BR>> >>>> is=<BR>> > a<BR>> >>>> world away from our own. I think we have to privilege the work <BR>> >>>> just=A0d=<BR>> >one and<BR>> >>>> that all the efforts come to a good end. As long as I have understood <BR>> >>>> t=<BR>> >he<BR>> >>>> situation,=A0the conditions that Isabelle has mentioned in her <BR>> >>>> mail=A0a=<BR>> >re<BR>> >>>> imposed by the publisher. But we also have to think in the editor <BR>> >>>> posit=<BR>> >ion<BR>> >>>> here. When one researcher decide to edit a volume she/he decided this <BR>> >>>> h=<BR>> >aving<BR>> >>>> all his/her circunstances in mind, since we are researchers and not <BR>> >>>> professional editors. We have many, many=A0others think to do. So if <BR>> >>>> we change=A0the circunstances, we are forcing=A0her/him to confront a <BR>> >>>> new publisher, probably a new evaluation and editing=A0processes and <BR>> >>>> so on.=<BR>> > It is<BR>> >>>> not fair =A0we asked to our colleagues for more time to invest in <BR>> >>>> this. Furthermore I think the prirority should be the papers be <BR>> >>>> published soo=<BR>> >n,<BR>> >>>> no wonder if they are published in hardcopy or as electronic <BR>> >>>> publicatio=<BR>> >n.<BR>> >>>> So I think we can: =A01) accept the conditions that the publishers <BR>> >>>> are imposing and discuss the selection criteria (which it is not ideal <BR>> >>>> but =<BR>> >it is<BR>> >>>> not bad from the view point of those who had just answered the <BR>> >>>> consult:=<BR>> > the<BR>> >>>> selected papers will be in a hardcopy ) or 2) to publish all the <BR>> >>>> papers=<BR>> > in<BR>> >>>> an electronic publication ( in the WBRG site or other),=A0and <BR>> >>>> take=A0pr=<BR>> >ofit of<BR>> >>>> all the=A0hard work just done.<BR>> >>>> Best<BR>> >>>><BR>> >>>> Dra. Vivian Scheinsohn<BR>> >>>> INAPL/CONICET<BR>> >>>> 3 de Febrero 1370<BR>> >>>> 1426 Capital Federal<BR>> >>>> E-mail: scheinso@retina.ar<BR>> >>>> Dra. Vivian Scheinsohn<BR>> >>>> INAPL/CONICET<BR>> >>>> 3 de Febrero 1370<BR>> >>>> 1426 Capital Federal<BR>> >>>> E-mail: scheinso@retina.ar<BR>> >>>> _______________________________________________<BR>> >>>> Bonetools mailing list<BR>> >>>> Bonetools@listserv.niif.hu<BR>> >>>> https://listserv.niif.hu/mailman/listinfo/bonetools<BR>> >>>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >>> _______________________________________________<BR>> >>> Bonetools mailing list<BR>> >>> Bonetools@listserv.niif.hu<BR>> >>> https://listserv.niif.hu/mailman/listinfo/bonetools<BR>> >>><BR>> >>><BR>> >><BR>> >><BR>> >><BR>> >> --<BR>> >> Elisabeth A. Stone<BR>> >> Department of Anthropology, Graduate Program in Archaeology<BR>> >> MSC01-1040, Anthropology 1<BR>> >> University of New Mexico<BR>> >> Albuquerque, NM 87131<BR>> >><BR>> >> elisabethastone@gmail.com<BR>> >> (m) 201.344.2229 =A0(o) 505.277.8301<BR>> >><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> ><BR>> >--=20<BR>> >Elisabeth A. Stone<BR>> >Department of Anthropology, Graduate Program in Archaeology<BR>> >MSC01-1040, Anthropology 1<BR>> >University of New Mexico<BR>> >Albuquerque, NM 87131<BR>> ><BR>> >elisabethastone@gmail.com<BR>> >(m) 201.344.2229 (o) 505.277.8301<BR>> ><BR>> >------- End of forwarded message -------<BR>> ><BR>> >_______________________________________________<BR>> >Bonetools mailing list<BR>> >Bonetools@listserv.niif.hu<BR>> >https://listserv.niif.hu/mailman/listinfo/bonetools<BR>> ><BR>> <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> _______________________________________________<BR>> Bonetools mailing list<BR>> Bonetools@listserv.niif.hu<BR>> https://listserv.niif.hu/mailman/listinfo/bonetools<BR> <br /><hr />Deel je favoriete foto's online met <a href='http://www.microsoft.com/netherlands/windowslive/Views/productDetail.aspx?product=Photos' target='_new'>Windows Live Photos</a></body>
</html>