J-Dog
Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006
|
| Quote (Richardthughes @ Oct. 18 2007,09:28) | Thanks for you help, everyone.
I got the paper and also a feedback form, which has the following categories:
| Quote | Title reflects content
Attractiveness of the title
Readability
Factual accuracy
Technical Accuracy
Originality
Contribution to field
Methodology
Development of argument
Depth of analysis
Statistical analysis
Conclusions and recommendations
Managerial and/or policy implications
Physical presentation
Tables/Charts/Diagrams
References
Value to academics
Value to policy makers
Value to practitioners
Value to research students
|
as well as general comments and a changes / recommend? section. |
Richard - Too Bad! From looking at the discussion guidelines, I'm guessing that this is not Dembksi or Other Noted ID Scientest's latest research.
It would have been good clean fun for you to read the foot notes referring you to BA77's deep discussions, or Pie Charts outlining DaveTard's bannation record, and missing out on a chance to grade O'leary for "Readibility" must hurt.
Please get over the disappointment, and have fun anyway.
--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10
Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08
UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11
|
