Darn, I really tried to stay out of this but...
The way I deal with a complex problem is to break it down to its basics. Publications are supposed to add to your knowledge. The primary question you should ask yourself is 'Does this publication add anything to my current understanding?'. If the answer is yes, then the paper is a success and was worth doing. If the answer is no then it is a failure. Simple.
This of course is a very personal and subjective grading system. A "basic" paper maybe very informative to me but quite useless to the Artzis', Jims and Philips etc. The fact that some have a greater understanding and gain less from it, does not make it a worthless, laughable, piece of crap.
Like Jim, I have been trolled into too many useless arguments with people with too small of minds to get over occasional factual errors or typo's, who also can't seem to understand that publications may be ment for only a specific portion of the community. Constructive criticism and corrections are always welcome, but, some of the spiteful bile seen is completely inappropriate and quite frankly, pathetic.
My $0.02 CDN (which is getting close to $0.02 USD)
Jeff
|