Posted by: Dan | August 16, 2006

Peer-Review and the Carnival Submission Process

Tangled Bank #60 is up on FrinkTank, and it’s a truly pithy zeitgeist of science blogging.

I’m a little confused, however: my contribution, Genetic Programming and the Stem Cell Theory of Cancer has not been included. Was I rejected by the carnival’s “editorial review board,” or did I simply not meet an aesthetic standard? …I’m just curious.

Actually, I wouldn’t be all that surprised if, as blogging becomes more common over time, carnivals begin to implement some sort of peer-review just out of convenience and to keep carnivals manageable. I just don’t think that blogging, and blogging about science in particular, is anywhere near that point.

Either way, it would be interesting to know whether there was anything in the fine-print that I missed, and know what goes on “behind the scenes” when it comes to carnivals.

Update: It would seem that only somewhat off-color contributions were accepted by the FrinkTank hosts. Keeping science irreverant and entertaining is cool and all, but I didn’t know that plain ol’ vanilla science was out of style. Bummer.


  1. Scientists find brain evolution gene


%d bloggers like this: