tea.mathoverflow.net - Discussion Feed (Math Journals reputation)

Cam McLeman comments on "Math Journals reputation" (9070)

Cam McLeman — Wed, 15 Sep 2010 06:02:44 -0700

Agree with Ben. Given that the question is of borderline appropriateness, it really needs a lot more effort from the poster to frame it in a "good question" (a la the FAQ) sort of way.

Ben Webster comments on "Math Journals reputation" (9056)

Ben Webster — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 21:14:35 -0700

My take: questions about how well respected journals are are not categorically inappropriate, but this one definitely is.

voloch comments on "Math Journals reputation" (9055)

voloch — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 19:33:09 -0700

The eigenfactor link someone posted on a comment is a "not horrible" global ranking. The question itself is very bad because of the narrow scope and lack of explanation. I've already voted to close.

Noah Snyder comments on "Math Journals reputation" (9054)

Noah Snyder — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 19:28:43 -0700

These sort of "state your opinion publicly about a controversial topic" questions I don't like, they have too much of a chance of making MO look bad.

Yemon Choi comments on "Math Journals reputation" (9053)

Yemon Choi — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 19:28:01 -0700

Also, I share David's somewhat conflicting reactions to the question: on the one hand, it's "pub rules" discussion; on the other hand, it's important "pub rules" discussion for junior mathematicians.

Yemon Choi comments on "Math Journals reputation" (9052)

Yemon Choi — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 19:26:25 -0700

If the question had been phrased more along these lines then I'd be more kindly disposed towards it.

David Speyer comments on "Math Journals reputation" (9051)

David Speyer — Tue, 14 Sep 2010 19:23:44 -0700

How do you all feel about http://mathoverflow.net/questions/38758/math-journals-reputation ? I don't like it because I don't like saying in public "Oh, I think think well of Journal X and not Journal Y." Moreover, I am aware that any such judgments will be subjective, and I don't like question which don't have right answers.

But journals certainly do have reputations and, while not rigorously defined, I think there is a strong consensus about what they are. And it's the sort of thing that is very hard to learn without asking a mathematician. It's the sort of question I would just ask respected senior colleagues, but I don't think it's good for math that some aspects of professional life have to be learned by having a personal relationship with an older colleague. So maybe it's good to get this sort of information out on the internet where everyone can benefit?

By the way, I won't be answering this question even if it stays open, because I think I pay much less attention to the differences between journals than my colleagues do.