Markup View

Author: mauri

Jul 10th 2013 at 12:48:01 PM

^While I know a detail on the [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review review]] (for more information the wikipedia link, specially under the Scholarly Peer Review which is the one I was focusing in but didn't invest much thought into it as the absent minded individual I can be) there is also the fact that new ideas get shot by peers but normally superiors in the academical field (namely works that mix more than one tree of knowledge) probably due to Editors power (the reason it is called, even in a "blind test" the style or ideas are called onto the case and a bias is making its line to work). Problem is that most of the issues that call this on Real Life are sensitive to the point of {{Flame Bait}} due to one part of the system saying it works while shooting down the other part due to a technicality or something. But given the {{Flame Bait}} value it is better to avoid it.

That is why I left the idea and the work of "if it invokes it in real life then it is this". The reason there will be technicalities and different points of view since what works in one country won't work in another (what works in China won't work in US as the saying goes) and that sadly includes the peer review process.

Still better to focus on other options that won't call any Flame war since are things that work more in other fields.

Edit: Before forgetting this detail: I don't want a flame war over this and if it is too much of a calling let it be. Reason why it pops up is when the bias of the only editors available is too much to be of help.