From owner-interactions-board@ACM.ORG Fri Jul 3 09:56:40 1998 Received: from mail (mail.acm.org [199.222.69.4]) by mail.acm.org (8.8.5/8.7.5) with ESMTP id JAA172008; Fri, 3 Jul 1998 09:52:59 -0400 Received: from ACM.ORG by ACM.ORG (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8c) with spool id 1012477 for INTERACTIONS-BOARD@ACM.ORG; Fri, 3 Jul 1998 09:52:59 -0400 Received: from zeus.cwi.nl (zeus.cwi.nl [192.16.184.120]) by mail.acm.org (8.8.5/8.7.5) with ESMTP id JAA163292 for ; Fri, 3 Jul 1998 09:52:57 -0400 Received: from schoener.cwi.nl (schoener.cwi.nl [192.16.196.114]) by zeus.cwi.nl with ESMTP id PAA01761 for ; Fri, 3 Jul 1998 15:38:45 +0200 (MET DST) Received: by schoener.cwi.nl id PAA02370; Fri, 3 Jul 1998 15:38:27 +0200 (MET DST) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <199807021112.HAA19274@mail.acm.org> X-Mailer: VM 6.43 under 20.4 "Emerald" XEmacs Lucid Message-Id: <13724.55333.53885.261780@schoener.cwi.nl> Date: Fri, 3 Jul 1998 15:38:25 +0200 Reply-To: ACM interactions editorial board Sender: ACM interactions editorial board From: Steven Pemberton Subject: interactions editorial board To: INTERACTIONS-BOARD@ACM.ORG In-Reply-To: <199807021112.HAA19274@mail.acm.org> Status: RO Dear all, You will have noticed that, as promised, an email list has been created for the interactions editorial board, called interactions-board@acm.org The purpose is to make it easier for me to contact you, and to use as a basis for discussions between us as necessary. The idea is to keep it low-traffic (please!). Below is a short report from Jennifer Bruer, our managing editor, based on notes she took at the editorial board meeting at CHI 98. If it comes as a shock to you to hear that there was such a meeting, it is because I couldn't find an email address for you in time. There are still 3 people who I only have rubber email addresses for: John Rheinfrank Richard Rubinstein Craig Wier and possibly John Thomas (though it may just be a transient fault at his end which bounced his email). If anyone can help here, I'd love to hear. A major issue at the meeting was the creation of Special Issues. If you think you can organise a special issue on any topic, please get in touch with me. In any case, we need your help in acquisition of material. If you see or hear anything that would be good in interactions, please let us know! Thanks all! Best wishes, Steven Pemberton ---- interactions Editorial Board Lunch Meeting, Tuesday 21 April 1998, 12:00-13:00 In attendance were (maybe incomplete, as people came and went during the meeting): Steven Pemberton (Editor-in-Chief), Jay Blickstein (Executive Editor), Jennifer Bruer (Managing Editor), David Riederman (SIGCHI ACM Liaison), Board Members: Randolph Bias, Tyler Blake, Alan Edwards, Wayne Gray, Jonathan Grudin, Austin Henderson, Tom Hewett, Karen Holtzblatt, Robert Jacob, Steven Jacobs, Finn Kensing, Thomas Landauer, Gene Lynch, Aaron Marcus, Ian McClelland, Jim Miller, Michael Muller, Jakob Nielsen, Dan Olsen, Steven Poltrock, Kathleen Potosnak, Kevin Schofield, Tom Stewart, John Thomas. Steven Pemberton chaired the meeting and asked what the members like about interactions, and what they don't like. Most responses were very positive. Some comments: Karen Holtblatt: play on the domain idea (like done at CHI 98), Currently, the content is not always hanging together, interactions is not building areas for authors to write. Jakob Nielsen: interactions needs to write more for Web designers. Get content for them and advertise. The idea of having themes in each issue was raised. Kevin Schofield asked if we should have themes in each issue. The editorial board agreed that some issues with themes are a good idea, but not every issue needs to have a theme. Steven Pemberton asked the editorial board to get more involved with acquisition of articles. The board said if they were asked to find articles or writers for specific topics, that would help. It's not that easy to just ask people to write about anything they are working on, but a focus of content would help. There was a consensus that short, snappy articles are preferred. Tom Hewett said interactions currently is responsive not proactive -- perhaps that should change. The review process was discussed. The board agreed we need to revisit the review process. Asked: how many reviewers does each paper need? How long does it take for a paper to be reviewed? If it takes too long, people will not want to submit articles to interactions. Reviewers need to know what the magazine is about. There was discussion of the Design Awards (run in the May/June 1996 issue). Who owns the awards -- interactions, SIGCHI,...? The consensus is (as stated by Karen Holtzblatt) -- do it if you can fund it. No one wants to do an inadequate job. If we are to have Design Awards, there needs to be a winner, and money needs to be spent to do it right. The board agreed that SIGCHI should own the Awards. The discussion of CHI as a society and where interactions would fit in was begun. Steven Pemberton proposed that in the future interactions could become the flagship publication of SIGCHI, and that the Bulletin would become an on-line publication. Some people objected to the Bulletin becoming completely on-line for the following reasons: not everyone, especially people in developing countries, have access (Michael Muller), not all students would have access because not all universities and colleges provide students with access to the internet (Kevin Schofield). An email list is being created for all members of the editorial board so there can be more discussion and connectivity for the editorial board. ---