i felt like this deserved it's own thread here....this is complete horse****, and all 6 people who voted against the changes should immediately resign their positions in APSE.
in the newsletter it says that if all the editors present had a vote, it would have passed overhwelmingly. well, why not give all the editors a vote?
oh that's right, because the editors of the big papers are soooo scared of having some extra competition and don't give two ****s about the 205 under 40,000 papers.
i mean, there are SEVEN times as many entrants under 40 as over 250.....are you kidding me? big-paper editors, does it really make you feel good to know your section is better than 12 others? to put the little blurb in your paper the next day to tell your readers all about it?
the 6 of you should be ashamed. last year it was the same b.s ("this will be revisited next year") and it was revisited, this time in an even more fair way for the big papers, and it was shot down again.
pathetic.
in the newsletter it says that if all the editors present had a vote, it would have passed overhwelmingly. well, why not give all the editors a vote?
oh that's right, because the editors of the big papers are soooo scared of having some extra competition and don't give two ****s about the 205 under 40,000 papers.
i mean, there are SEVEN times as many entrants under 40 as over 250.....are you kidding me? big-paper editors, does it really make you feel good to know your section is better than 12 others? to put the little blurb in your paper the next day to tell your readers all about it?
the 6 of you should be ashamed. last year it was the same b.s ("this will be revisited next year") and it was revisited, this time in an even more fair way for the big papers, and it was shot down again.
pathetic.