Site for comments on draft articles to the Bharat Rakshak Monitor / Security Research Review e-journals.
HOW TO SUBMIT AN ARTICLE
1. Please send your articles as an email attachment to editorSRR at gmail dot com
2. We must have your real name and contact information in your email for all submissions. You may prefer a pen-name (BRF handle) on informal articles, but SRR peer-reviewed articles must have real names and contact info.
4. Please pecify if you want the article sent out for anonymous peer review (SRR), or have the article discussed in the open BLOG at this stage, or both.
5. You may use Microsoft Word or LaTex, or simply a long text article in the email body for shorter ones.
6. BRM draft articles will usually appear as a link on the BLOG within a couple of days for user comments. SRR peer review drafts will appear likewise if the author so requests. Thanks!
I respect Jagans work as an author, so please dont take my following comments out of proportion. It is often the case that a domain expert may fail to connect with his target audience, that is the case here.
This is a very disappointing review. The problem is it brings nothing of interest to a reader who would expect something substantive from a BRM/SRR article. For one, is the VCD/DVD available to the average viewer - the article doesnt make it clear. As a review, it completely fails in bringing forth the initial questions it raises and topics it alludes to- the IA vs IAF controversy. Does the review mention what the participants say, even in brief? And say, for more, watch the video? No. One is left with a wonderment that the review is about a video that seems to have nothing more than something of interest for a fan who deeply adores such things. But what of the average viewer? The review should contain:
A brief bit about what the participants, those interviewed, say- a precis about their views and the author clearly defining what the video says about Longewala would be great. Some interesting trivia from the video. More about how long it is, and how it can be acquired.
Subhash, thanks for the comments - I will address some of your concerns in an updated version of the review.
However one thing i can state ahead of time - you wont be able to find the answer to the questions that you probably are most interested in -
"it completely fails in bringing forth the initial questions it raises and topics it alludes to- the IA vs IAF controversy"
The film precedes the controversy and has nothing on this - so there wont be much to add other than a cautionary note - that viewers shouldnt look for answers to that controversy in this film.
Jagan, thank you for taking the time to address my statements. In hindsight, I do hope I didnt come across as acerbic, as that wasnt my intention. However, what I wished to state was not that you provide salacious details but merely a couple of lines stating that the Longewala battle was indeed an IAF tour de force would be enough. Or you could skip the reference to the controversy altogether, in the review. As it stands, it conveys the impression that the review would touch upon it, or is related in some manner.
4 comments:
I respect Jagans work as an author, so please dont take my following comments out of proportion. It is often the case that a domain expert may fail to connect with his target audience, that is the case here.
This is a very disappointing review. The problem is it brings nothing of interest to a reader who would expect something substantive from a BRM/SRR article. For one, is the VCD/DVD available to the average viewer - the article doesnt make it clear. As a review, it completely fails in bringing forth the initial questions it raises and topics it alludes to- the IA vs IAF controversy. Does the review mention what the participants say, even in brief? And say, for more, watch the video? No. One is left with a wonderment that the review is about a video that seems to have nothing more than something of interest for a fan who deeply adores such things. But what of the average viewer?
The review should contain:
A brief bit about what the participants, those interviewed, say- a precis about their views and the author clearly defining what the video says about Longewala would be great.
Some interesting trivia from the video.
More about how long it is, and how it can be acquired.
Thanks
Subhash
>>Does the review mention what the participants say, even in brief?
When i say this, I mean thier views, not that x talks about AOP, and y speaks of how to bomb etc.
Subhash, thanks for the comments - I will address some of your concerns in an updated version of the review.
However one thing i can state ahead of time - you wont be able to find the answer to the questions that you probably are most interested in -
"it completely fails in bringing forth the initial questions it raises and topics it alludes to- the IA vs IAF controversy"
The film precedes the controversy and has nothing on this - so there wont be much to add other than a cautionary note - that viewers shouldnt look for answers to that controversy in this film.
Jagan, thank you for taking the time to address my statements. In hindsight, I do hope I didnt come across as acerbic, as that wasnt my intention.
However, what I wished to state was not that you provide salacious details but merely a couple of lines stating that the Longewala battle was indeed an IAF tour de force would be enough. Or you could skip the reference to the controversy altogether, in the review.
As it stands, it conveys the impression that the review would touch upon it, or is related in some manner.
Subhash
Post a Comment