Re: [tlug] Journals, Authors and 'Free Peer Review'

[Benjamin Kowarsch <trijezdci@example.com>]

On 25 September 2018 at 23:56, Raymond Wan <rwan.kyoto@example.com> wrote:

Personally, I still would rather take my vacation than use
ArXiv as my motivator.  But that's just me...

I don't understand what you are trying to say.

> At the end of the day, it is the work you do and the quality
> of that work
> which will determine how people judge your abilities, not
> the name dropping
> of magazines and publishers in your CV.


Not every human resources department or grant review
committee agrees with you.

HR departments are stuffed with drones who lack the gift of thought and reason

and their only tools are crude buzzword searches anyway. What you need to do

to your CV to get to the next stage going THROUGH the HR department is exactly

that which will get you rejected once you are at the next stage. The key is to

bypass HR altogether so that you can submit a good CV that isn't buzzword

stuffed for HR to that hiring manager. Hiring managers generally know that HR

departments are useless and if scholarly work is relevant to them, then they

will perfectly know of the 1:7 ratio of success when submitting to a journal.

And grant review committees also know of that ratio.

Some think like you and would be happy to hire you / offer
you a grant.

There is nobody on any grant committee anywhere who is under the illusion

that 100% of a researchers papers could ever make it into a journal.

You do not need to hide the 6 out of 7 articles that did not get published in

any peer reviewed journal from any hiring manager,

nor do you need to hide those 6 out of 7 articles from any grant committee.

regards

benjamin