Re: guidelines for technical reviewers

Subject: Re: guidelines for technical reviewers
From: Kris Olberg <kjolberg -at- IX -dot- NETCOM -dot- COM>
Date: Tue, 11 Nov 1997 20:49:40 -0600

-----Original Message-----
From: CJACOBS.US.ORACLE.COM <CJACOBS -at- US -dot- ORACLE -dot- COM>
To: TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU <TECHWR-L -at- LISTSERV -dot- OKSTATE -dot- EDU>
Date: Tuesday, November 11, 1997 7:20 AM
Subject: guidelines for technical reviewers


>No doubt all of you have experience with technical reviewers who return
>review
>packets late, or not at all, or not containing the kind of review comments
>that you were hoping for.


One technique I've seen employed a number of times is to require a signature
from a reviewer. My personal experience as a technical reviewer is that it's
a lot harder for me to put my signature on something when I know darn well I
haven't looked it with a critical set of eyes.

Regards...Kris
------------------------------
kolberg -at- actamed -dot- com
kris -at- olberg -dot- com

Posts: mailto:techwr-l -at- listserv -dot- okstate -dot- edu
Commands: mailto:listserv -at- listserv -dot- okstate -dot- edu (e.g. SIGNOFF TECHWR-L)
Archives: http://listserv.okstate.edu/archives/techwr-l.html,
http://www.documentation.com/, or http://www.dejanews.com/
Subjects: JOB:, QUESTION:, SUMMARY:, ANNOUNCE:, or none of these.



Previous by Author: Re: From Documents to Resource?
Next by Author: Re: Quick Reference Guide - format
Previous by Thread: guidelines for technical reviewers
Next by Thread: ANSWER: FrontPage won't let me at my work. Why?


What this post helpful? Share it with friends and colleagues:


Sponsored Ads