LISTSERV at the University of Georgia
Menubar Imagemap
Home Browse Manage Request Manuals Register
Previous messageNext messagePrevious in topicNext in topicPrevious by same authorNext by same authorPrevious page (December 1999, week 2)Back to main SAS-L pageJoin or leave SAS-L (or change settings)ReplyPost a new messageSearchProportional fontNon-proportional font
Date:         Fri, 10 Dec 1999 14:41:04 -0800
Reply-To:     dward <dward@SASHELP.COM>
Sender:       "SAS(r) Discussion" <SAS-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From:         dward <dward@SASHELP.COM>
Organization: The World's Usenet/Discussions Start Here
Subject:      Re:

> The solution I think is to have an optional process for peer > review. > This could apply not only to code, but also to articles, > tutorials, etc. > Postings which had gone through the process would be flagged with > some > kind of symbol.

Great idea! But how could the logistics work... Would the review process be open to *all* programmers or just a select group that are recognized as *experts*? In either case, the criteria for declaring information *approved* would need to be explicit and generally agreed upon by the entire SAS community. Maybe a program/tutorial, etc. could first be placed in a draft/pending category, then as the SAS community reviews it they rate the item. Then, at a certain point, the item could move into the approved category?

Just ideas David Ward

* Sent from RemarQ The Internet's Discussion Network * The fastest and easiest way to search and participate in Usenet - Free!

Back to: Top of message | Previous page | Main SAS-L page