Re: Fwd: [CfP] International Lisp Conference '07 (news)

On 12/10/06, Pascal Costanza <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> It's a conference, and it is peer-reviewed.

But I hardly think of ILC as being a peer to the major peer-reviewed
programming languages conferences.

By the way, I'm not at all critical of ILC.  To the contrary: I think
it's wonderful that it exists, and it was with truly great regret that
I turned down an invitation to give a talk at it.

But I don't think much is gained by "inflating" an event like ILC, and
I do think something is gained by "deflating" it -- letting it serve
as a testing-ground for new ideas, giving them an opportunity to get
an airing and feedback, before turning it (where appropriate) into a
more significant conference publication.

Put differently, the people who are not academics are unlikely to
care, while those who are academics do care about these distinctions.
Given the ease of publishing material on the Web, the importance of
organizations like the ACM is greatly diminished.  So the DL buys you
little -- but costs you (possibly) a lot.

Shriram