On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 10:11 AM, Aaron Halfaker <aaron.halfa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The review process occurs in all instances where review coordination is > requested (by emailing me or DarTar). There's only been one case where a > review took more than 2 weeks and that was because the researcher didn't > respond to requests for more information quickly. > > Nathan, I think you are mistakenly thinking that all research needs to be > reviewed. Only research that involves the recruitment of Wikipedians as > subjects is intended to be reviewed via RCOM's process. Only those studies > that request it will be reviewed. > > -Aaron > > > > Thanks, perhaps the confusion exists because there is so much apparent infrastructure around the review process (including a big button that creates a research project page, ostensibly to facilitate a review). It might also be that communication from the former RCOM's members is misleading; in one e-mail in this thread you say RCOM is defunct, and in another you suggest that research recruiting Wikipedians needs RCOM's review. Either there is an RCOM and it functions effectively, or nothing should or must rely on a defunct committee to complete a defunct process. If the committee is indeed defunct, then messaging around the review process should be adjusted to make it clear that it is voluntary, and there are only two reviewers acting on their own initiative. Your insistence on having it both ways is leading to confusion, not just from me but on the part of people proposing research projects and expecting comment from "RCOM."
_______________________________________________ Wiki-research-l mailing list Wiki-research-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wiki-research-l
