Originally posted by
I'm uncomfortable with this too, especially the threatening tone and having one EF contributor "keeping track" of other equal peers.I think this type of thing should be left to admin (Stormy), or someone assigned the job by
I'm uncomfortable with this too, especially the threatening tone and having one EF contributor "keeping track" of other equal peers.I think this type of thing should be left to admin (Stormy), or someone assigned the job by admin.
Not meaning any offense, Ms. N, I know you're just trying to solve the problem.
I, too, felt very uncomfortable reading this post. The tone of it did not sit right with me at all. First of all, it's being said that you're going to call out people. Which... I don't think is really your place. I mean, if you were an admin, or head of the editing program, then fine. And, maybe you are. But I was under the impression that you were, like the rest of us, another contributor. Secondly, saying that you are "keeping an eye" on the other editors... well, I'll be honest, that just sounds a little creepy.
On top of that, it seems like you are implying that some editors are simply point farmers. Which also does not seem like it's your place to say. As Stormy herself said, sometimes people take the extended review ones because they're easier to edit. I will admit that I prefer the extended format when I edit, as I can do it in pieces with ease. Edit a little here, save that section, walk away for awhile, come back and do a little more... that sort of thing. That's not to say that I wait around for an extended format review to appear in the task market, or that I will not edit a standard format review.
I know that you didn't mean it to seem that way, Ms. N. However, it seems like a post of this sort would've been better posted by Stormy, if she thought it were an issue. As Stormy has posted here that, yes, we have two weeks to get reviews published... AND that editors have always been able to choose which reviews they edit... well, it does not seem that there is really an issue.
(whoops, this post wasn't directed at ImaGodiva -- other than to say that I was in agreement.)