Re: [port-peer-review] Deadline past, now what?
Hi Mary, (01)
I feel so guilty for being among the wholly unholy "inefficient." (02)
I'm heading off for 5 days at Martha's Vineyard and even there have to
prepare
a new syllabus for the course I'm teaching beginning June 24th (a new
textbook has been approved and suddenly ordered for the
Summer session). I don't imagine I'll have access to the internet up
there, but I'll take addresses just in case. I've decided, at least,
not to work the all-day Saturday session, since I need some sort of a
break (though I could use the extra money for the Bulgarian
conference trip because of the lack of college funding). (03)
I sense how difficult it's been for you re: your Mother and family--but,
yet, you remain "efficient." I don't know what I'm doing
wrong, except I know that, for example, during final exam week last week
I was still finishing preparing for then presenting a workshop for 30+
members of
the Philosophy and Critical Thinking faculty on uses of technology in
the classroom (in short, working on college projects continuously to the
very end). None of this explanation helps you, I know. I don't know what
to say. It seems so existentially "beyond my control" (or, in
terms of efficiency, beyond my ability to control). (04)
Like Uta, though, I too look forward to ICCS and to seeing you, Aldo and
others, and talking and thinking together. (05)
Of course I tend to agree will all the substantive comments you made
regarding self-criticism/self-editing. Now were there only some way
in addition to make oneself efficient in the larger sense. Meanwhile,
may we weed our own gardens as best we can, and hope to help with
the weeding of other gardens in the interest of creating as much
beautiful intellectual scenery and a context for good collaborative work
that
we can. I'm sorry that I failed so miserably in the present matter. It's
no consolation that I'm not alone. (06)
Best regards in any event, (07)
Gary (08)
My best (09)
Mary Keeler wrote: (010)
>Dear All,
>
>For reference, I have included Eugene's original proposal for the
>reviewing process (see below).
> (011)