text:
Mopar Heater And A/C Restoration - Making It Cool AgainWritten by on October 1, 2008 Contributors: Courtesy Of MCR You Can Do Your Own Heater/AC Restoration
Have you ever noticed that there are some aspects of a musclecar restoration that are not very glamorous? I'm not talking about getting dirty rebuilding your engine or being coated in dust as you prep your car for paint. There are rewards for successfully completing those jobs. A well-detailed, strong engine or flawless, baby-butt smooth paint will bring you a lot of praise for your efforts.
But when was the last time you heard anyone remark about how great someone's heater box looks . . . probably never. But I'll bet you appreciate a properly working A/C on those mid-summer afternoons, or a little heat on a late-season, early morning cruise. If nothing else, you'd simply like your heater core to not drip antifreeze on your fresh carpet. No, it's not a glamorous job, but it's oh so much easier (read actually possible) if you take the time to pull the whole assembly out of the car.
This heater/air-conditioning box is out of a '68 Barracuda and is part of our progressive restoration series. The guys at Muscle Car Restorations (MCR) have done a lot of these over the years and have few tips that will save you some time and frustration.
More Photos From This Article View Slideshow
The heater-core cover fiberglass gets brittle with age; if you just slip a screwdriver behind the clip to pry if off, you'll break the little ridge that holds the clip in place. Instead, use the screwdriver as shown to pry down and lift the edge of the clip up and then out.The hoses are color coded so take careful notes on the routing. The same goes for the wiring. Taking detailed photos is a really good idea. You'll need to test the vacuum actuators and make sure they work in both directions-they should push and pull. New ones are not available so you'll have to track down good used ones if any of yours are bad.Don't be surprised to find broken fiberglass, especially around the support rod that attaches to the cowl vent opening. MCR uses a two-part bumper repair product: Fusor 142 Extreme Bumper Repair Adhesive from the Lord Corporation. It's strong, flexible, and sandable. Don't be afraid to be generous with the adhesive; this repair doesn't need to be pretty because it's hidden inside the box.Here is a part that has been recently replaced. This is the blower speed resistor. The resistor coils protrude into the airflow and are somewhat exposed to the climate. It's common for them to get rusty and break off.You wouldn't be the first one to try to remove the blower motor by removing the three nuts on top of the housing. Instead, remove the three 1/4-inch screws from around the perimeter and then carefully pry the motor with the attached cage off the lip. Test the motor by simply applying power to the leads. Listen and check for bad bearings.
The yellow fiberglass insulation firewall pads are usually bad, and repops are not available for A/C cars. You can make one out of a non-A/C car pad or cut one from a piece of a fiberglass hood blanket that you can find under a number of car hoods. A piece of sound deadening pad from under your car's carpet could also work well.This is the evaporator temperature control switch. It has a long probe attached to it that monitors the temperature inside the evaporator coil and will shut the system off if it starts to freeze up. The probe can be difficult to remove, but it must come out to remove the coil. Don't be afraid to pull hard.Removing the evaporator-coil cover reveals a fairly fine screen positioned over the coil. Remove the screen to get at the coil itself. Unless it's severely damaged, just clean and reuse it.This is why you need to remove the coil. Most have never been removed, and this one has forty years of debris behind it. If your A/C system worked fine before you took it apart, then all you should need to do to your coil is clean it and comb some of the fins. If you don't know for sure that your coil is good, it would be wise to take it to an A/C shop to have it tested for leaks. In this case, they are not available new.The foam on the vent doors is always bad, and again, new parts are not available, but fortunately, the foam from a fuel tank pad works great.
YearOne does supply these firewall gaskets so be sure to make use of those as well as the foam tubes around the heater core pipes. The firewall insulation pad was actually in pretty good shape so it was reused.This end of the box receives fresh air from an opening on the bottom of the passenger side of the cowl. The foam gasket is commonly bad, but a roll of 3/4-inch foam tape from a local hardware store works great. The small rod hooks to the bottom of the cowl to draw the box up tight.The foam around the A/C opening that seals to the back of the dash is not available (that we are aware of), but it is often OK to reuse it. Just wash it in some soapy water and maybe flip it over. If yours is really bad, any soft foam that you can get at a hardware or craft store that you can cut or glue to fit will be fine.it's a good idea to get a buddy to help you reinstall the entire assembly. What you need is someone on the firewall side to thread the nuts on the studs that hold the unit to the firewall.Before you tighten up the firewall nuts, insert this rod through the vent opening, hook it into the cowl, and insert and tighten up the bolt to seal the box against the bottom of the cowl.Don't be tempted to skip installing the foam around these tubes because it keeps debris, water, and cold air out of the interior.


text:
Section navigation
Episode Guides
About the Show
US sitcom about four aliens who arrive on Earth and assume human identities to pose as an average family living in Ohio in order to observe life on the planet
Series 2 Summary
The second series of the US sitcom finds the Solomons' mission under threat as Evil Dick's plans for domination take shape. Can Dick escape from confinement and retake command?
Episode 1 - See Dick Continue to Run
While Dick remains trapped in the basement, his doppelgänger Evil Dick embarks on a plan to impregnate all the women in Ohio, and makes the other aliens miserable with his unreasonable demands.
Episode 2 - See Dick Continue to Run, Continued
As Evil Dick attempts to seduce Mary Albright, the other aliens help the real Dick to escape from his prison and challenge the interloper, who is given a special escort back to his planet.
Episode 3 - Hotel Dick
Appalled by the treatment of aliens in a hit sci-fi movie, the Solomons attend a science-fiction convention to set the record straight. Sally gets hooked on room service.
Episode 4 - Big Angry Virgin from Outer Space
Sally and Mr Randell's relationship comes under pressure, but Dick's idea that sex will solve all their problems is no help. Harry tries video dating.
Episode 5 - Much Ado About Dick
When Mary Albright is afraid to be seen with Dick in public as a couple, the Solomons find out all about the human obsession with what other people think
Episode 6 - Dick the Vote
Harry runs for a seat on the city council after he is mistaken for a political activist by the media. Dick discovers the complexity of the democratic system and struggles to make the right vote.
Episode 7 - Fourth and Dick
Dick learns about the importance humans place on competition in the run-up to the homecoming weekend sports match. Tommy gets a crush on his Glee Club teacher.
Episode 8 - World's Greatest Dick
Motivated by his own vanity, Dick forces a reluctant Tommy to attend a special school for gifted students.
Sally is mistaken for a drag queen. Harry learns how to do magic tricks.
Episode 9 - My Mother the Alien
Dick discovers he lacks nurturing skills when he tries to look after Mary Albright's pet fish while she's away at a conference and accidentally kills them
Episode 10 - Gobble, Gobble, Dick, Dick
The aliens are puzzled by the Thanksgiving holiday, but they invite Mrs Dubcek and her daughter to their first celebration. Tommy visits the local pool hall.
Episode 11 - Dick Jokes
Dick is jealous when Mary Albright asks another professor to host a college fund-raiser she's organising because he is more witty, leading the Solomons to explore humour
Episode 12 - Jolly Old St. Dick
As the Solomons prepare to experience their first Christmas, Sally gets a job wrapping presents at the shopping centre, while Harry is employed as Santa's assistant
Episode 13 - Proud Dick
When Dick's pride gets the better of him over a parking space problem at work, he quits his university job and gets a position at a fast food restaurant. Harry loses his memory.
Episode 14 - Romeo & Juliet & Dick
When Tommy asks Dick to direct his high school production of Romeo and Juliet, Dick takes the job too seriously. Officer Don tries to sort out Mary's parking tickets.
Episode 15 - Guilty as Dick
While doing a favour for Mary Albright, Dick sprains his ankle and discovers the power of guilt when she feels bad about him being in pain. Harry moves into a tree house.
Episode 16 - Dick on One Knee
Sally's French friend Michel asks her to marry him so he can stay in the United States. As the wedding plans take shape, Tommy finds he has a talent for flower arranging.
Episode 17 - Same Old Song and Dick
Dick tries to bring the magic back into his relationship, but soon learns the difference between being in a rut and being comfortable. Sally and Harry switch jobs.
Episode 18 - I Brake for Dick
Dick feels guilty after running over a chipmunk in his car, so he becomes an animal rights activist to make amends. Harry tries to learn the skills taught to Boy Scouts.
Episode 19 - Dick Behaving Badly
When the family tell Dick that he is henpecked by Mary Albright, he asks Harry to help him become his own man. Sally and Tommy have a showdown over a game of Monopoly.
Episode 20 - Dickmalion
Mary Albright is irked when she's spurned the cream of Rutherford society, but when Dick makes the cut he discovers the high life is not all it's cracked up to be
Episode 21 - Sensitive Dick
Dick is forced to take special training after he comes down too hard on his students and they complain about him. Harry escorts Vicki to her high school reunion.
Episode 22 - Will Work for Dick
When Nina has had enough of being insulted and quits, Harry becomes secretary to Dick and Mary Albright. Meanwhile, Sally decides she wants to experience childhood.
Episode 23 - Fifteen Minutes of Dick
Sally becomes a celeb when she beats up Mark Hamill in a restaurant. Dick is jealous, while, as Sally's assistant, Harry becomes obsessed with keeping her on top.
Episode 24 - Dick and the Single Girl
A shy librarian is attracted to Dick, while Sally realises she's attracted to Officer Don because of his uniform. Tommy and Harry write an episode of The X-Files.
Episode 25 - A Nightmare on Dick Street Part 1
Dick decides to ask Mary Albright to marry him after she announces she is going to Borneo, but his anxiety causes nightmares for the whole family
Episode 26 - A Nightmare on Dick Street Part 2
Harry contacts the Big Giant Head so the aliens can return for maintenance. Dick decides to stay behind and face dying as a human rather than lose Mary.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Business Case for Diversity, My Foot
May 27, 2016
There's a ticklish situation I don't know how to handle. I strongly believe my boss and a co-worker are having a sexual relationship. She seems to get special privileges that aren't available to others. What should I do, if anything?
—Too Close for Comfort, manufacturing/production, Newport News, Virginia


text:
1969 Dodge Super Bee - The Timber Wolf ProjectWritten by on November 1, 2007 We Can See The Light
In the publishing industry, we're accustomed to deadlines. Each month, we do our research, write and edit our articles, then turn them in by the deadline (well, at least close to the deadline) so our readers can get their magazine on time. When it comes to our automotive projects, however, we're used to deadlines that are a little more ambiguous. Sure, we'd like to get our projects done quickly, but we know that finding parts, scheduling outside labor, and, frankly, having a limited amount of spare time and money are all contingencies that can keep us from meeting our self-imposed deadlines. While this method isn't a big deal when we work on our personal cars, we must admit when we were given the opportunity to build a car with the Timber Wolf Speed Shop, we were concerned about our ability to meet the imposed deadline so this car could be given away.
We know it's possible to complete project cars quickly because we've done it in the past-the B3 is a good example-but everything needs to be coordinated correctly. Sources of outside labor such as the paint-and-body shop and machine shop can really mess up a schedule if they don't finish their work in a timely manner. Parts procurement can be another issue as back-ordered or unavailable parts can cost hours of valuable time that could be spent working on the car. Luckily, all the parts we needed were quickly obtained from our project sponsors, and our machinist and painter both did a great job meeting our schedule, even when each found problems with their respective part of this build.
When the guys at J.D.'s Paint and Body discovered our car would need to be stripped completely to the original metal, adding many hours of labor to the project, they pitched in and got the job done, even working after hours and weekends. Kevin at Auto Performance Engines also expedited the machine work on our engine parts, getting them back to us in plenty of time to complete the engine for our Super Bee. If it weren't for these guys and the many great sources we used to obtain the parts for our project car, we'd certainly be behind schedule at this point of the build.
As it stands, we're doing pretty well. our car is very close to being ready for reassembly. All the bodywork has been completed, and the car has been sprayed in FY1 Top Banana Diamont paint. We know we'll get a few letters telling us that FY1 wasn't available until 1970, but we felt the theme of this build warranted a high-impact color, and what better color for a Bee than yellow! Of course, we'll highlight the stunning yellow paint by blacking out the hood and adding the obligatory black "bumblebee" stripe around our car's tail.
Inside the car, Classic Auto Air will be upgrading the environmental system with better-than-new aftermarket heat and air conditioning; Auto Instruments will be rebuilding our gauge cluster; and the remainder of the interior will be finished with new parts from YearOne and Legendary Auto Interiors. We're keeping the interior of our Bee pretty stock, adding new parts, refurbishing original equipment, and making subtle upgrades where needed, but we decided to stay with the basic "bare bones" theme that the Super Bee and Road Runner were known for.
When it came to the drivetrain of our project car, we wanted it to be anything but stock. We admit we did consider transplanting a 440 into the Super Bee, but since the car came with its original 383 between the fenders, we decided not to change the numbers-matching engine. Instead we had the block fully machined and will be filling it with new goodies from Speed Pro, Comp Cams, and Clevite, just to name a few. We want this project to be fun to drive so we won't go overboard with cam or compression, rather build a solid engine that will perform well on the street or strip. We'll detail the engine build in an upcoming issue so be sure to stay tuned.
With the car painted, the engine going together, and the parts procured, the end of Project Timber Wolf is finally in sight. Of course, now it's up to us to get everything put together in time for the car to be given away, but we're used to working nights and weekends. Somehow our motivation level just gets higher once we know we have everything in place to complete a project. The feeling of completing this car and taking it for its first testdrive will be almost as good as the feeling we'll get when someone wins this car and gets to enjoy it for years to come.
You Could Win This Car Or One Of Five Other Classics At The Timber Wolf Speed Shop.
Go to TWSPEEDSHOP.com for details.
No purchase necessary to enter or win in the Timber Wolf Speed Shop promotion. For official rules and info on how to obtain a free code, visit www.TWSPEEDSHOP.com. Starts 12:01 a.m. CT 5/15/07 and ends 11:59 p.m. CT 11/1/07, or while supplies last. Open to legal residents of the contiguous 48 U.S. & D.C. (excluding VA & MA), 21-or-older, tobacco users, and who have a valid U.S. driver's license. Void in VA, MA, and where prohibited.
Sponsor: Pinkerton Tobacco Co. LP.
More Photos From This Article View Slideshow
If you've been following this project you know the car we're building was a mess when we got it. Even worse, shoddy bodywork was hidden under the low-quality paint that adorned our Super Bee. Even so, this project is nearing completion.Pictures can't show the hours and hours of prep work required to perfect the body of our giveaway car. The guys at J.D.'s did an outstanding job of getting our Super Bee arrow straight.When setbacks looked like they might delay our project, J.D. pulled out all the stops, even enlisting his "better half" to help with the sanding. And for the record, Donna is the "much better half" of this team, sorry J.D.!Since the Super Bee was taken to bare metal for this project, all the seam sealer that was scraped out had to be replaced. This is one of the final steps before our car will roll into the paint booth.After many hours of prep, project Timber Wolf is finally rolling into the booth for paint. This is one of our favorite parts of restoring a car-watching the color go on.Prior to applying paint, J.D. uses a tack cloth to remove any remaining dust or debris from the primer.Since yellow is a light color and doesn't cover very well, J.D. applies a single coat of white basecoat to the car to ensure the final color is consistent over the entire car.
The engine bay is often overlooked while a car is being painted. We like to prep our engine bay the same way we do the rest of the car, ensuring the car's owner won't be embarrassed to open the hood and show off what's underneath.The doors, hood, and trunk are all painted separately from the car. This ensures good coverage and allows hard-to-reach areas to be better prepped for paint.For a show-quality finish, the paint is wet sanded and buffed after it's allowed to cure. This is the step that gives the paint that smooth-as-glass look we're after for this project.Since this car doesn't have accents like a vinyl top to break up the yellow, we decided to paint the hood satin black. This should be a nice contrast, especially when we put the stripe on the back.While the car was being painted, Kevin at Auto Performance Engines was busy machining our engine parts. The heads will be treated to all new guides, a high-performance, multi-angle valve job, and new springs to match our Comp flat-tappet camshaft.It's common for the exhaust bolt-hole threads of big-block heads to be in poor condition, especially if the car has had headers installed. Our heads needed a couple of Heli-coils, and the rest of the holes were cleaned up with a tap.For a clean appearance, the wheelwells, underside of the car, K-frame, and master cylinder support are all taped off and painted black.Our parts are back from the machine shop; now it's up to us to assemble the engine. We'll be using Speed-Pro forged pistons in this 383, as well as internals from Comp Cams, Clevite, and Mopar Performance. Look for the complete engine build in an upcoming issue.As you can see, our project has come a long way since we started. There's still a lot to do, but the end is in sight. This will be one sweet Super Bee when we're finished, so look for the completion of project Timber Wolf in future issues, and be sure to register for the drawing as this car will be given away once completed, quite likely to one of our readers!


text:
Receiver Hitches
Magnus Receiver Hitches
From: $102.90Free ShippingWeight Carrying up to 10000 LBs, same rating or higher ball mount and hitch ball, weight distribution system is required if apply, vehicle frame attach only Learn More
Upgrade Your Truck by Installing Receiver Hitches
Trailer hitches and receiver hitch accessories that are available on the market today have come a long way since they were first introduced. As many truck beds are limited as to how much weight they can carry as well as the size of the item, it only makes sense to invest in a trailer hitch for your vehicle. Adding a receiver hitch to your vehicle will allow you to carry trailers, vehicles and other larger items that you would normally not be able to place in the bed of your truck.
A receiver hitch mounts directly onto the frame of your rig and is compatible with ball mounts, trailers and other various hitch-mounted accessories. When investing in a trailer hitch, you will typically have a few classes of trailer hitches to choose from. Each class varies as to the maximum amount of weight that they can carry safely. Trailer hitches are able to carry anywhere from 2,000 pounds to over 10,000 pounds. Depending upon the type of vehicle you have, you will need to determine which receiver hitch and hitch accessories are best. You will likely want to choose the receiver hitch that is strong enough to handle the maximum weight of the trailer and what you will be hauling on it. Obviously, the trailer hitch classes that are able to handle more weight are more suitable to install on larger trucks. The Class III receiver hitch is known as the most common type of trailer hitch today as it is the most suitable trailer hitch class for many larger cars, trucks, vans and SUVs. A Class III tow hitch receiver is helpful for towing accessories such as boats, small cars, jet skis, motorcycles and other heavy cargo that may weigh up to 5,000 pounds. A Class IV or Class V trailer hitch is designed for more heavy duty vehicles that can carry more weight.
A receiver hitch is commonly described as a square tube that is often mounted below the rear bumper of your vehicle. You can also install a receiver hitch to the front of your vehicle too if you desire more functionality from your vehicle. In addition to a trailer hitch for car, you should also be sure to have a ball mount as well. A ball mount is the metal tube that slides into your hitch and includes a hole for a hitch ball to utilize when towing. A trailer hitch cover may also be an additional accessory to consider investing in. A trailer hitch cover is a square metal tube that fits into your receiver hitch and usually includes a decorative emblem on one end of it. A trailer hitch cover can be customized to include the logo of your favorite sports team, outdoor hobby and many other designs.
Choosing the ideal receiver hitch, receiver hitch rack and other trailer hitch parts should be a process that involves careful consideration. The last thing that you want to do is choose the wrong accessories for your vehicle and lose your trailer while driving down the highway. As trailer hitches and accessories are custom-built for any vehicle, you can be sure that you will be able to find the correct receiver hitch that fits your vehicle's specific year, make and model.
Helpful Articles
- (Aug 09) Dodge Dakota Trailer Hitch
- (Jun 21) The 2013 Ford F150 debut
- (Mar 26) Review of 2012 Dodge Caravan
- (Feb 21) F250 on Super Duty on Duty
- (Dec 23) 2012 Ram 1500 Review
- (Dec 08) Picking the Right Truck: Silverado, F-series, or Others
- (Nov 25) No Need to be a Guinness World Stacker; A Trailer Hitch is all that Takes
- (Nov 11) Auto Accessories and the Lipstick Effect


text:
March 2012 Archives
Sonoma State American Language Institute in Japan
The Sonoma State American Language Institute (SSALI) sent four faculty members to Japan to teach an intensive 10-day English course for Nihon University. The instructors, Miriam Hutchins, Berta Hodges, Peter Vincent, and JuHwan Kim spent the time with 36 students from Nihon at a seminar house in Tateshina, located in the Japanese Alps. Ms. Hutchins, Ms. Hodges, and Mr. Vincent taught Everyday English, Intercultural Communication, and Communication in Business Situations during the day. Mr. Kim lead the students in language games and activities in the evening. SSALI has been hosting students from Nihon University for the past two years during its summer program.
Some of the instructors stayed on to visit potential sources for SSALI recruitment. Ms. Hutchins will visit Anan National Technological College and Miyazaki International College in southern Japan. Ms. Hutchins, who has mentored students from Miyazaki International College for the past twelve years will have the opportunity to attend the Miyazaki graduation and meet up with some of her former students. Ms. Hodges will be traveling north of Tokyo to visit Nagano University, Tsukuba University, and Niigata University of International and Information Studies. In addition, Ms. Hodges will meet with one of SSALI's recruiting partners in Tokyo, Steven Hamade of Apprez, Inc. She will also meet several former SSALI students. Mr. Kim will travel to Seoul before returning to SSALI to make contact with four of SSALI's recruiting agencies there.
This marks the first time in over ten years that SSALI faculty have traveled out of the USA for recruiting purposes. The opportunity has been made possible due to the invitation from Nihon University, which covers the bulk of travel and housing expenses. It is our sincere hope that these personal contacts will lead to stronger ties between SSALI and schools in Japan and Korea.
Helen Kallenbach
Director, Sonoma State American Language Institute
1801 East Cotati Ave.
Rohnert Park, CA 94928 USA
Fax 707-664-2742
Online Learning
Extended Education is interested in furthering the mission of making classes as available and accessible as possible to students and the community. Toward that end, we are building up our course offerings in online and hybrid (partly online, partly face to face) classes, as well as offering support to faculty for converting existing face to face classes to an online or hybrid format.
Faculty can access our Faculty Online Course Development Handbook to view tips, suggestions, and a handy checklist for online course development. In addition to the handbook, we offer services for faculty such as:
• Getting Powerpoint lectures into accessible format
• Delivering Powerpoint lectures as video/audio
• Insuring adherence to Extended Education online checklist (see page 58 in the Faculty
Online Course Development Handbook )
• Converting Powerpoint slides to VoiceThread, a powerful new tool for interactive
• Designing visual aspects of Moodle course in the Extended Education format
• Creating a video of the instructor introducing him/herself inside Moodle
• Creating and placing YouTube videos in Moodle
• Assisting with initial Moodle set up
• Providing other services as needed
If you are a faculty member interested in moving toward an online format, but needing extra support, please make an appointment with us and we'll be glad to sit down with you and discuss your ideas, your course goals, or whatever you need to move toward teaching hybrid or online courses.
Lee Brewster, Information Technology Consultant
School of Extended Education


text:
Monday, April 6, 2009
Journals: When to get Pissy?
At what point is it appropriate to get pissy with the journal editor? I usually send a "friendly inquiry" after four months. Then, depending on the response to the four-month inquiry, I usually follow up with a slightly antagonized version in the sixth month. But what should one do in the eighth month? When it is appropriate to withdraw the paper and tell the editor that you'll no longer consider submitting to the journal, and will dissuade others from doing so?
BTW: When I was untenued, I was subjected to treatment by a journal that was extreme in it sirreponsibility. I contacted the relevant people at the APA about it. They did nothing.
76 comments:
8 months? Man, you sure are honery. I usually wait a year before my first complaint. My "do not submit" list currently consists of the following:
Journal of Philosophy: 18 months, no decision ever reached, regret expressed by editor
CJP: 24 months, rejection, regret expressed by editor
Linguistics and Philosophy: 36 months (before I just gave up and submitted elsewhere), no decision ever reached, no response from editors
I've currently hit 19 months at another well-known journal but b/c I've published there before and the editor has repeatedly expressed regret, I'm holding off on writing them off just yet.
- April 6, 2009 at 4:34 PM
Of course, I mean "ornery" and not "honery."
From the Urban Dictionary
HONERY!!, using all CAPS and two EX points...
verb--a state of being Not,
adjective, a lust-filled wondering wandering
the formal state of Horny Orneriness where one, usually a superior male individual, expresses in deafening silence --as if it were a banner hanging from a "flag pole" waiting to be saluted --one's utter exacerbation with a specific superior member of the opposite sex, without being noticably impolite or unfriendly, yet hoping ...
- April 6, 2009 at 4:51 PM
Yeah, I've got a couple of journals on my NEVER AGAIN list, and the Journal of Philosophy is at the top with asterisks. And there are others, for example, the journal that took 10 mo to get me an R&R letter, and then after the resubmit, it took 12 more months to give me a flat rejection with no explanation.
In the case of the latter journal, I had thought that there was either a level of incompetence that was inexcusable or that there was some grudge being worked out against me. Either way, I thought the editor needed a stern letter. But I didn't send it, because I'm untenured (and have already a reputation for a short temper, and this wouldn't help).
I think that if you're going to send a stern letter, it should be *before* a rejection comes. If you want your message to get through, you don't want the letter read as another bit of feedback from a disgruntled rejected author. If I were to do it again, I'd have pulled my paper at the 9 month mark, and in each case, with my patented boilerplate "Go Jump in the Lake" Letter.
Oh, and Spiros, aren't you at the stage of your career when you only do invited material?
- April 6, 2009 at 7:18 PM
I've had very good experiences with P&PA. Two papers w/ initial decisions in 3 months. In the latter case, a R&R was decided in two weeks. Both times the feedback was relatively short but helpful. If P&PA can get their act together like this there is no reason why other journals cannot. More than 3 months is bad, but more than 6 months is insane, and no less insane for being common.
- April 6, 2009 at 8:53 PM
I had a J Phil piece under review for 17 months, a Mind piece under review for 12 months, a Synthese piece under review for 12 months, and an Australasian piece under review for 12 months. It's frustrating because I'm an untenured nobody who was trying to publish my way out of a shitty, shitty job and my best work was sitting on people's desks for no real reason. I've been ranting all day and all last night about the latest, so I thought I'd share this. I submitted a paper to a decent journal where I argued for a variety of conclusions, chief among them that phenomenal conservatism is unmotivated and generates all sorts of absurd results. After a two sentence summary that didn't actually correctly summarize the view I was attacking, here's what I get in response:
"The objection is that this thesis must lead to a "crude relativism." For suppose that it seems to each member of a group of cannibals that it is morally OK for them to eat people and suppose that there is nothing in the surrounding culture that speaks against this idea, then according to phenomenal conservatism, they are justified in thinking that cannibalism is morally OK. But then it couldn't be true that it they should refrain from cannibalism. But it is true that they should refrain from cannibalism. To think otherwise is to accept a kind of crude relativism. Since we cannot accept crude relativism, phenomenal conservatism must be false.
It is hard to see that there is anything new or interesting about this argument. The general issue has been discussed since Herodotus' first account of what he took to be cannibalism.
The present paper offers no argument to show why it must be true that the cannibals ought to refrain from cannibalism in any relevant sense. Nor is any argument offered to show that there is something wrong with crude relativism.
Perhaps the claims of the paper can be dismissed as exhibiting crude objectivism or crude absolutism.
Ho hum..."
I love it. There's no problem with the exceptionally complicated argument that purports to show that someone's theory of _epistemic_ justification generates these absurd results concerning our _moral_ obligations. No, the problem is with my naive assumption that there's something wrong with cannibalism. I appealed to the editor hoping that he agreed that if you show that your opponents view is no more defensible than cannibalism you win. That didn't work.
- April 6, 2009 at 10:47 PM
- Spiros said...
PA: Waiting a year seems to me to be entirely too passive. There's no good reason why a review process should take more than 4 months. There are some acceptable excuses for its taking 6 months. But 8 months seems to me excessive and harmful to the profession.
Remember: part of what journals are supposed to do is facilitate quick dissemination of the most current research. A year in review typically means a year until print (at best). That defeats the purpose. We shouldn't allow it.
- April 7, 2009 at 12:03 PM
- Spiros said...
Kronos recalls a statement we heard uttered by a named chair in our profession that went like this:
"I don't publish in peer-reviewed venues any more. All my publications now are invited."
The distinguished chair took this as a proof of his/her extraordinary level of scholarly accomplishment-- as if to say, "I have no peers." Hilarious.
- April 7, 2009 at 12:07 PM
- Spiros said...
Anon 8:53: P&PA is typically very good. So is Ethics, in my experience. There's no reason why other journals can't be more like them.
- April 7, 2009 at 12:09 PM
- Spiros said...
Anon 10:47: I once had a piece rejected on the grounds that the paper did not cite my own work-- the reviewer claimed that it was "a sign of the author's incompetence that s/he does not cite the influential work of [Spiros]."
- April 7, 2009 at 12:12 PM
Spiros -- re: your 12:12, this is a problem I am now facing. I'm responding to someone who claims that X on the basis of Y. But I've argued elsewhere that ~Y, and hence my response to this person inter alia involves the claim that X can't be based on Y. Now the problem is do I (a) cite myself in third person, or (b) simply allude cryptically to my own "elsewhere" in which the argument against Y is presented? I worry that if I don't do either of these I'll get a similar response. But choosing (a) makes me seem highly unoriginal, and choosing (b) would probably automatically reveal my identity.
- April 7, 2009 at 1:05 PM
Anon 1:05-
You should go with the Simon Blackburn strategy, and write, 'according to me . . .'
But seriously, this seems to be a pickle. Would it be kosher to cite yourself in the third person, and then, once accepted, change the citation? That seems like a fine and honest thing to do.
- April 7, 2009 at 1:11 PM
Yes, I lean to the third person option, and I think it would be honest. My worry is that it may seem as if I am piggybacking on someone else's work, whereas I am merely extending my own to the question whether X follows from Y (a question I only vaguely touched on in the original article).
Then again, maybe each publication ought to make its own substantive point, so whether or not ~Y has been defended elsewhere by myself or another person shouldn't affect the merits of the present paper. Except that's not how people think.
- April 7, 2009 at 1:16 PM
Re Anonymous @ 1:05
Given the obscurity of my work, I can safely cite "Author's Article" without fear of my identity being revealed. In fact, given my own personal obscurity, I could cite my name without revealing anything substantial.
- April 7, 2009 at 1:23 PM
- Neil said...
The interesting question is why do journals take so long? Bad reviews are a fact of life; reviewers have prejudices and quirks. So long as the opportunity costs of submission aren't too high, we wouldn't worry overly about this fact, because we would know that the breaks would even out, and good work would find a good home. So the problem is that reviews take so long that the costs of a bad review are high (esp. for untenured folk). There are two possible explanations of why reviews take so long. 1. Because reviewers take so long, or 2. because editors sit on reviews (of course this is an inclusive or). As an editor myself, I suspect that 1 is the main culprit. It follows that the profession is to blame. maybe YOU are to blame (I'm not: I have never taken more than 10 days to review a paper, and I try to do it in 48 hours). Editors can help by blacklisting slow reviewers (refusing to accept their submissions).
- April 7, 2009 at 8:39 PM
I am the editor of a journal (not a top tier one, but one that is important to SOME people in terms of professional advancement), and in addition, I am the editor of one of the prestigious book series in the entire discipline.
Folks such as you should know that the challenges faced by journal editors are not easy to understand until you have tried it yourself. We editors are often seen as beastly narcissistic individuals, elevated to positions of critical judgment we do not deserve. There is some truth in this, but as always, the world is more complex than that.
Rounding up enough willing referees to handle all the garbage generated by sloppy, careless people, and sent my way, is enough of a task. If those submitting articles looked upon the task as more than just aiming high and praying, it would help everyone. But every time I draft someone to referee a paper, I incur a sort of informal debt to that person for taking the time to offer a judgment. I have no control over when the judgment comes in or how much effort heshe has expended in offering it. But I am bound by it. If I do not follow the judgments of my own referees, I will have alienated those referees while either (1) over-extending my own editorial discretion of (2) spending another few months trying to get a better judgment on the same piece of work. Before I will do that, I have to really be convinced that a serious injustice is being done. So I read the article myself, I sometimes augment the comments or soften them, adopt the conclusion of the referee, make a note that the referee was either too slow or unfair or not thorough, and chalk it up to experience. I have 322 pp. per year I can say "yes" to. I have four to five times that much in submissions. Some of those rejected ought to be published, some that are published are weaker than some of those rejected. Some people don't hear back for a year, others get an answer in two weeks. I cannot control this. Unlike some editors, I answer all queries and I tell the truth. But I can understand why some editors do not. That doesn't excuse them, but I understand it.
I appreciate patience from submitters, but I don't mind being prompted after four months. Being prompted by the submitter leads me to prompt the referee. I can safely prompt a referee twice, after about three months and after about six. After that I have to hope. It cannot become a point of contention between me and my circle of supporters. If the review never comes in, I have to pretend like that never happened, and I just dont send that person and new papers --but I also have to replace him/her with someone of like standing and similar expertise, and I have to be careful not to over-tax my faithful helpers. It is a constant struggle, in addition to keeping funding in place, managing the journals affairs, and managing the managers of the journal's affairs. For doing this I receive NOTHING. I am a tenuired full profressor in a research university. I get no money, no usable prestige, many enemies, no advancement (I have nowhere to go, and if I wanted an endowed chair, I need to quit doing the journal and spend the time on my own books), no nothing. I get the satisfaction, several times a year, of holding in my hands a journal that is, in my oipinion, worth reading, cover to cover (with a few exceptions), and knowing that the people who published in my journal are proud to have been included, and to be read alongside the others who also got in.
And by the way, Spiros, I haven't submitted a paper of my own to a journal for actual refereeing for about a decade, publishing by invitation only with no one exercising judgment over the outcome of my work but rather publishing it sight unseen and feeling fortunate to have it. That is not narcissism on my part, that is liberation from a terrible prison of irrational chance, and I wish you godspeed in getting to where I am. Luck plays a part, but there is no substitute for hard work.
- April 7, 2009 at 8:59 PM
- Spiros said...
Anon at 8:59:
Thanks for the post, and all the unwarranted assumptions contained therein! It's a true pleasure to meet you. You post prompts so many thoughts... Here are a few.
1. I take it you mean to include me in the "folks such as you" when you say that,
>"Folks such as you should know >that the challenges faced by >journal editors are not easy to >understand until you have tried >it yourself."
How do you know that I'm not the editor of a journal? How do you know that I've never been one? How do you know of anyone posting here that they've never tried to edit a journal? Let's see now... You don't.
2. Here's a tip for you in your office as journal editor: The stuff you receive that's "generated by sloppy, careless people" should be rejected by you as editor and not sent out for external review (yes, this requires you, as editor, to read the papers before sending them off to review-- something you suggest you don't do!). That you see fit to send the work of sloppy and careless philosophers out to review is part of the problem. Maybe if you sent out fewer papers by sloppy and careless people, your reviewers would be more eager to review what you send.
3. You first say you receive "NOTHING" for your (rather lax, it seems to me) efforts. But then you say that you receive satisfaction. So which is it?
4. If you find editing a journal to be such a drag, why not resign?
5. Good to hear you've produced nothing that's gotten past blind review for a decade. You're surely correct that "luck plays a part, but there is no substitute for hard work." But what's your point? Is you claim that you're professionally beyond blind review because of your hard work and not because of luck, or what? Since your work is accepted for publication "sight unseen," how could you know? I think I'd rather not get to where you are-- sounds to me like a demotion.
- April 7, 2009 at 10:36 PM
So as a new hire, it sounds like my best bet is to send a paper out to a couple of journals at a time. Granted, if I get caught it could be bad. But can't I just plan on one of the journals taking way too long, and then withdraw it from consideration there if the other one decides to publish it? Doesn't the benefit of having twice the chance at a publication outweigh the risk of both journals accepting it, or of there being a common reviewer, or something else going wrong? I realize this idea probably sounds crazy to you, but I simply can't afford to wait 18 or 24 months for a rejection. I don't have enough papers and I don't have enough time.
- April 7, 2009 at 10:41 PM
- Spiros said...
Anon 10:41:
I understand the civil disobedience impulse. But multiple concurrent submissions floods the field with so many more papers, it's hard to see that as sustainable.
There's a philo journals wiki that allows people to post info about review times and the usefulness of referee reports. You might have a look:
- April 7, 2009 at 11:01 PM
I hate to pile on, but Spiros let me agree with you about the invited publication thing. Isn't this counterproductive? Usually by the time someone reaches this stage of a career, they are in the 'I can't be wrong because I'm famous, so I'll recycle my tired ideas' phase: younger philosophers, who are more with the current debates, and who have to face the peer review process, seem more likely to publish relevant stuff. Of course there will be counter-examples.
- April 8, 2009 at 12:07 AM
Sorry: no intended ageism in the above comment: rather, anyone who is with current debates will be more relevant, and invited publications seems like an excuse - and I can think of a handful of examples off the top of my head - to recycle tired shit.
- April 8, 2009 at 12:08 AM
I'd just like to plus the BJPS model, which seems to work wonders. Decisions are promised within six weeks - it took 8 once for a paper of mine, but they apologised about it. Reviewers are asked to take 4 weeks, and receive a reminder after 3. This doesn't seem to offend anyone. Is there any good reason why other journals shouldn't adopt the same practice?
- April 8, 2009 at 6:24 AM
Spiros, I know you're a jerk, and that you like it that way, so I won't be bothered by your smirks, jabs and your patent narcissism.
One cannot be sincere with a person like you because you won't have it. You think philosophy is some sort of big chess game and the trick is to check-mate your enemies. Well go ahead have fun.
But I was silent on the issue of whether I send out every paper for review. Your inference was incorrect. I send about half out for review --those that meet the formal requirements of our journals mission and are substantial enough to require the judgments of specialists. But I have to read them ALL (another inference of yours that is both incorrect and does not follow from anything I said).
By "you folks," I meant those puzzling about why journals can take so long to get reports and judgments back. If that doesn't describe you, Sprios, you may excuse yourself from the class of referents.
As for whether I need blind reviews to know whether my work is any good, may I suggest that there could be more than one way of learning whether one's work is good, and add that blind review is not even among the better ways of learning that. It does not follow that MY work is good, of course, but it doesn't follow that it isn't, nor does it follow that I have no way of knowing. Being snarky, which you have down to a fine art, and being able to reason well, in which you are deficient, are independent abilities.
I continue with my journal because I received charge of it as a sacred trust from some people I respect, and I have to stay with it until I can find others who will continue its service to the discipline. I have wanted to quit many times, but not enough to allow it to pass into hands about which I couldnt be sure.
And finally, you would love to have my job, even though you have a good one, because I exert far more power and influence in the profession than you dc, which is all you care about, and unlike you, I have no enemies and everyone respects my judgment. Thats what you really want but will never have because what byou cannot achieve with your native gifts and subsequent exertions you try to attain by being a bully and intimidating people. This strategy will not, in the end, serve your true goals, which is to have everyone's genuine and freely given respect. You would take my job because if you had it, you could finally relax and stop living in fear.
If these observations make you my enemy, and you decide to do sufficient investigation to find out who I am, then I will count it a mark in my favor that I have succeeded in being hated and feared by you. And you will not find many to join you in hating me. But you are lonely enough already, I should think, to be quite miserable.
- April 8, 2009 at 10:52 AM
- Spiros said...
Anon 10:52:
This is absolutely hilarious. I confess that you almost had me! I was just about to write a reply showing how stupid you are when I thought to myself, "really, can someone by *this* dumb?"! Then I got it.
Your post has all the trappings of the garden variety idiotic blog post: pop psychoanalytic diagnoses, passive-aggressive name-calling, self-righteousness, misplaced indignation, the fallacy fallacy, the ever-popular "If you try to respond to me, I will already have won" dodge, the self-serving "you wish you were more like me" trope, and my personal favorite, the "I feel sorry for you" closing!
A+ satire. Made my day. Thanks!
- April 8, 2009 at 11:15 AM
Huh. Better not send a stern letter to Anon's journal-- you'll get a very long letter back about how you really should *respect* how long it takes to get a decision on your work, and how you should send *more* stuff Anon's way. What is it about some philosophers that make them think they can do ~*Jedi Mind Tricks*~?
Though Anon's note does show something, namely, that journal editors are aware of the plight of junior folks waiting for decisions. And it also shows that journal editors are inundated with crappy papers and sloppy submissions. I wonder if the latter has an effect on the former-- that after a while of the drudgery of slogging through so many uneven submissions, editors come to resent submitting authors? And even friendly attempts to speed up or even be updated about the process are really unwelcome inpingements? If you've reached this point, maybe it's time to find someone else to do the job, yes?
- April 8, 2009 at 12:55 PM
At least Anon 8:59 & 10:52 isn't one of those editors who sends out papers that wouldn't get a passing grade in a graduate seminar that I often get to referee:
"I send about half out for review --those that meet the formal requirements of our journals mission and are substantial enough to require the judgments of specialists."
Or is he?
"Rounding up enough willing referees to handle all the garbage generated by sloppy, careless people, and sent my way, is enough of a task."
Now I'm confused. Why would you need the "judgments of specialists" to evaluate "garbage generated by sloppy, careless people"?
- April 8, 2009 at 1:11 PM
I'm a grad student who was asked to referree, thanks to an odd connection I had, a paper for an admittedly low-tier journal. It was such utter shit, that I wrote 4 pages of comments to justify my decision to reject (and have the author drawn and quartered). Once I saw the comments from other referees, I was relieved to have been in the majority.
Question to the wizened ones: does this happen at top-tier journals as well?
- April 8, 2009 at 2:09 PM
Hi PA. Fair point. Here is the explanation. I try very hard not to use my own judgment when the FORMAL requirements are met, as required by submission guidelines, the mission and readership of the journal, etc., AND when the paper is outside my own area of expertise. That leaves plenty of careless garbage about zombies and twin earth. Plenty. But I dont want to make my own judgment arbitrary. That serves no one. And we do publish papers I would have adjudged garbage until I saw the assessment of someone better qualified. The "carelessness" and "sloppiness" are almost universal, which is why over 90% of accepted papers require revisions for clarity, content, style, documentation, and thoroughness of research, in addition to modifications in content. Even at the highest level of the profession, where I work with books rather than journals, and even among the most widely recognized philosophers at the best universities, sloppiness and carelessness are the norm. It is a relief to receive the rare paper that has been well written, properly documented, and thorough --in addition to having something important to say philosophically.
Spiros: you are a genuinely pathetic narcissist. I really pity you, but there is nothing else to be done with you. You have dehumanized yourself as a means to dehumanizing others. It is so sad. And so unnecessary. It seems a shame that a man who knows as much as you do should need so badly to seem to know more.
- April 8, 2009 at 2:27 PM
- Spiros said...
Anon 2:27:
Wait a minute! That torrent of stupidity at 8:59 and 10:52 was *serious*? Really?
I thought all the errors and lapses and clumsy insults were a dead giveaway that you were faking stupidity. Apparently I was wrong!
So let me take a minute to thank you, once again, for your truly idiotic post. Thanks especially for all the hilarious Dr. Phil diagnoses. Only a great philosopher could see her way to making such complicated determinations about a person's motives, commitments, and character from a series of blog posts.
Convenient that after simply asserting a very wide range of claims intended to insult me, you then seal yourself off from any criticism in return-- since "nothing can be done with [me]," and I'm a pitiable "pathetic narcissist," who sees philosophy as some kind of eristic "game," no rejoinder from me needs to be taken seriously. How clever: you get to criticize, and then also get to simply declare that no worthwhile rejoinder is possible. It's a favorite tactic of cowards and frauds the world over. Congrats!
Now, since you're a coward and a fraud who's also stupid, why don't you look back over this thread and demonstrate to yourself that you began this nonsense about narcissism with a post whose content is all about yourself. Then remind yourself that no one asked you for your input, and that you're my guest here. Then go away until you find some manners and are able to act like an adult.
- April 8, 2009 at 3:03 PM
I can see I've touched a nerve. Sorry to have overstayed my welcome. Yes, you are dying to draw me out, aren't you, so that you can threaten a law suit. There are two kinds of people who might be drawn out by your taunts: (1) fools driven by testosterone and its close intellectual kin; and (2) people with nothing to hide who are not afraid of you. I am fairly certain I fall into the second group, but just in case my testosterone is the culprit, I own that as a possibility here.
And since you doubt my courage, I will cease being anonymous, which is what you want. My name is Randall Auxier, of SIU Carbondale. I edit the Library of Living Philosophers and the journal The Pluralist, published by the University of Illinois Press. Well, I suppose I'm not a fraud after all.
Thank you for your hospitality, such as it is. I realize that boys will be boys, and that this list is for that purpose, but I think it does only a small part of the good it could do. Good luck intimidating me.
- April 8, 2009 at 3:23 PM
- Spiros said...
Whoever you are @ 3:23:
I have no interest in who you are or in "drawing you out" for any purpose. You may be saddened to hear that you did not "touch a nerve"; you simply proved yourself to be foolish and rude. And your cowardice has nothing to do with anonymity-- which I suspect is still in place-- it has to do with following your insults with declarations designed to shield yourself from criticism (e.g., by asserting that the person who you insult is incapable of sincerity, incapable of reasoning, driven by testosterone, in the grip of some delusion, etc.). That's a coward's tactic-- since, when successful, it ensures that any rejoinder can be dismissed as only so much more bluster. And it's a fraud's tactic as well-- it mimics reasoned discussion, while in fact undermining it. Anonymity or not, you persist in this way in your most recent post.
That you persist in characterizing anything I've said here as "intimidation" is truly puzzling. But it's no matter, I'm not interested in your views about anything. Please go away.
- April 8, 2009 at 3:59 PM
- John said...
This discussion took a disappointing turn after a promising start.
I have a question for people who have been on hiring committees. (Really, two questions.)
How big a difference does it make, in your estimation, if an applicant has a publication in a top-tier journal rather than a lower-tiered journal? And is one's effort better spent trying to get several pieces published in lower-tier places, or a single piece published by JP or Mind or the like?
- April 8, 2009 at 4:26 PM
The kindest words anyone has ever said to me are said by you, when YOU imply the I'M a woman --I MUST BE, you think, because no man would berate you in precisely this fashion. I have never felt more deeply affirmed in my masculinity.
As for my anonymity being intact, I quote Marley to Scrooge (as well as memory will serve), "Man, what proof would you have of my reality beyond that of your own senses?" You want my SSN? You want the name of my high school girlfriend? Ha.
But you are correct. It's your playground here. Ill go home. Anyone from among your compadres who wishes to discuss in a sincere way how to get published and how to interact with journal editors is welcome to send me a note at:
Pleased to spar with you, Brian. Let's have a beer when I'm in Austin in May.
- April 8, 2009 at 4:29 PM
- Spiros said...
Dear John 4:26:
I think that we perhaps need three categories here: A-level, B-level, and C-level. A-level journals are the top-tier; C-level are the ones that people on a search committee will probably never have heard of (or that are generally regarded as unserious). Then there's the B-level: widely known and respected journals that are not regarded as top-tier, but are still seen as respectable. My view is this: A pub in an A trumps. A pub in a C hurts (and the more pubs in C venues, the worse). A pub in a B is good (thought not as good as an A). I think that in this climate, going on the market without at least a B publication is a really bad idea. If struggling for an A pub is going to prevent you from achieving a B pub (and you have no other pubs), then I'd go for the B pub...
Other Compadres:
When you turn to others for advice on these matters, you might look first to someone who still subjects her work to blind review. Remember: the point is not publication, but peer-reviewed publication in respectable and widely-read venues.
- April 8, 2009 at 5:07 PM
- Spiros said...
And for the record:
My name is not Brian and I have never stepped foot in Austin. And I don't currently live or work in Chicago, either.
If you're looking for a blog by someone named Brian, you might try this:
- April 8, 2009 at 5:18 PM
- mmdetritus said...
Whoa, Spiros. Careful with your anonymity. Not-Brian narrows the possibilities in the philosophical blogosphere down considerably.
I agree with the A-tier vs. B-tier answer to John. The candidate who only publishes in C-tier is in serious trouble. I would add that that a few B-tier vs. ONE A-tier would be better. Having more than one publication in decent places shows in adance that you are not a one-trick pony AND that you have the drive and discipline to publish (i.e., that you are a good candidate for tenure).
As for time considerations, at least one can be set aside: there are enough A-tier journals with reasonable tournaround times so you shouldn't have to worry, as a time-crunched junior faculty member or grad student, about the vicissitudes of JPhil or Mind.
- April 8, 2009 at 5:28 PM
- Spiros said...
Sounds right. One thing to keep in mind, I think, is that in a reasonably decent philosophy department (one that would be looking at the tier of the journals candidates have published in), *many* of the faculty will have had the experience of being rejected an A journal. So making it into an A is impressive, but it seems like it should also be the case that *not* having made it (yet) is forgivable, especially if there are other decent publications.
- April 8, 2009 at 5:37 PM
To John: (ignoring the meta-theatrics -- fictional self-outings, an obviously fake journal name, feigned ignorance of BL's current employer, etc. etc.)
I've been on search committees at a good research department (e.g. 2-2 load, everyone regularly publishes in top journals), and we emphatically do not give job candidates credit for pubs in weak journals. This does come up fairly often in meetings. It might not directly hurt you, but it's really not to your credit at all to have published in a weak journal. More than one publication in a weak journal might harm you directly.
[Previewing, I see that others more or less concur. As for 'B'-journals, well it depends on the case...]
My personal view is that I can forgive someone who's coming up for tenure for burying his or her work in an obscure place out of desperation that the clock is running out. (Maybe the work is nonetheless good. Read and see...) But someone whose clock hasn't even started? What's the point? To show that you're willing to give up working on an idea before it is good enough to make any difference?
The whole idea that grad students should be trying to publish strikes me as suspect. Five or six people in my graduate cohort a few years ago got elite jobs, and several others among us got very good jobs, and not one of us in that cohort had published anything (in philosophy journals) before we got a couple of years into the t-track. The point of a philosophical education is to learn how to make contributions to philosophy, not to learn how to add lines to your CV.
That's 'old school,' I know (though I'm fairly young). But I think this view -- the opposite of what many upcoming job candidates take for granted -- is quite widely held on search committees.
I'm curious, Spiros (and others): do you really expect people on the market for the first time to be getting their work under submission? (Expect, I mean, in the normative sense?)
- April 8, 2009 at 5:49 PM
Anon 5:49-
As a student who next year will begin PhD studies at a non-top 20 school, the advice I've been given across the board is that I should definitely plan to have a few things published or forthcoming when I hit the market. Only the MIT or NYUers can afford to have nothing published these days when they hit the market. If this is wrong, then bad advice is the order of the day.
Really? Is this about all those 'South Park and Philosophy' articles? Is this a now very drawn out satire?
- April 8, 2009 at 6:03 PM
- mmdetritus said...
Relativizing the answer to the grad program is a very good idea. It is much more crucial to publish coming out of, say, Carbondale than it is coming from Rutgers.
I used to argue exactly what Anon 5:49 did (and this was actually pounded into me in grad school), so I have a lot of sympathy for the argument. Do good dissertation work in good time. If you can do that without the distraction of worrying about publication, then that's great. But people from non-top programs don't have the luxury, I think (as Anon 6:03 has been hearing). And even people from top programs are now, ever more frequently, competing with others from the same programs with publications and this makes a big difference.
Spiros: that seems right. A lot of this turns, as John noticed, on what counts as a B journal.
- April 8, 2009 at 7:03 PM
- Brian Leiter said...
Dear Professor Auxier,
Spiros e-mailed me about the weird turn this particular discussion has taken. I actually have a couple of blogs, as you may know, and I post under my own name there, and anywhere that I comment on other blogs. But maybe you didn't know this, since you also seem to think I'm still in Austin, Texas. Actually, since last year, I'm here: http://www.law.uchicago.edu/faculty/leiter/
I understand that your department has been unhappy with its treatment in the PGR, since you and others have a higher opinion of your department's excellence in its areas than other scholars in those areas. (In that regard, I've even talked with people who do not respect your judgment, or your work, at all, though I assume this isn't really news to you; but I also do not doubt that plenty of others do respect your judgment and work.) In any case, apart from the PGR, I am not quite sure what I could have done to provoke the particularly intense, and slightly unbalanced, level of obsession with me evidenced by your comments, above.
One of the giveaways of actual narcissistic personality disorder, as you may know, is grandiosity and boasting that is not borne out by reality; this often manifests itself in acting as though others admire and are jealous of the narcissist. (This is standard DSM diagnostic criteria, if you care to look it up.) Now when you write this,
"you would love to have my job, even though you have a good one, because I exert far more power and influence in the profession than you do, which is all you care about, and unlike you, I have no enemies and everyone respects my judgment. That's what you really want but will never have…. You would take my job because if you had it, you could finally relax and stop living in fear,"
I am inclined to think that you may be suffering from a personality disorder and would encourage you to discuss the matter with a professional. I sincerely hope you are happy with your job and your professional stature, but why would any normal person make the claim that Spiros or I would really prefer the other person's job, and his professional importance, and the 'universal' respect he purportedly enjoys? This is, one might think, quite peculiar boasting.
I do want to say, though, that I am flattered that you think I'm Spiros, since Spiros is usually a better writer and much funnier than I am, which is why I like to read his blog.
- April 8, 2009 at 7:10 PM
- Spiros said...
Anon 6:03:
For what it's worth, I think the advice you're getting is right. I also think that one doesn't need an article in JP, Phil Rev, or P&PA right out of the gate. A paper in a more modest, but well-established and recognized journal (e.g., Phil Studies or J Pol Phil) would be fine.
However, I'd avoid like the plague anything that smacks of being backwater or published-out-of-a-basement. Roughly, any journal that your average SC member might not recognize the name of should be avoided.
- April 8, 2009 at 7:12 PM
You're right. Spiros is the better writer, and funnier. I'm the narcissist, by DSM, as you suggest. All granted. But you're the one with the enemies, abosolutely everywhere (see the signers of Heck's letter, and you will note that I signed it a long time ago). I wonder how you managed that? Are ALL of these people cases of sour grapes? Must all slights be personal? Or could a person of good conscience, like Richard Heck, for example, just object in principle to everything you stand for? I suppose a person could so object, whether he had been personally slighted or not. On the other hand, and in all fairness, I could be wrong to hold your (joint or identical) efforts with "Spiros" to turn the discipline of philosophy into a popularity contest, as being beneath contempt. You (two?) might be right, and I might be the sophist/narcissist/weak-minded/sour-begraped one. But what can one do apart from following one's conscience?
- April 8, 2009 at 7:43 PM
But what can one do apart from following one's conscience?
Get a life?
Step away from the keyboard?
STFU already?
- April 8, 2009 at 7:48 PM
If this Anon isn't really Auxier, then I pity poor Auxier for having his good name be so besmirched.
- April 8, 2009 at 9:14 PM
Let me get this straight: BL is to be pitied because he has lots of enemies. *And* BL is to be pitied because he's turning Philosophy into a popularity contest? It seems only one who sees the profession as a popularity contest could see "X has many enemies" as a criticism.
- April 8, 2009 at 10:16 PM
Three things:
1. Given that Anon 7:43 has already admitted to being Randall Auxier, why does he continue posting anonymously?
2. How does Anon 7:43 reconcile the suggestion that signing Heck's letter suffices for being an enemy of Leiter with his claim that many of the signatories of said letter did so in good conscience and not out of animosity to Leiter?
3. mmdetritus 5:28: Not only has Spiros narrowed down the possibilities as to his identity by revealing that he is not named "Brian", by revealing that he doesn't currently live or work in Chicago he has confirmed that he is not Martha Nussbaum.
- April 8, 2009 at 10:34 PM
Ok. In a post from Dec 08, Leiter claims access to info about the IP addresses of commentators to this blog. See:
How does he get such info if he's not the blog owner?
- April 8, 2009 at 10:44 PM
"I'm curious, Spiros (and others): do you really expect people on the market for the first time to be getting their work under submission? (Expect, I mean, in the normative sense?)"
I'm not Spiros (or Brian Leiter, for that matter. That's something I share in common with Spiros. Seriously, BL = Spiros? I know more about punk than BL and less than Spiros. You finish the proof.) I'll throw in my $.02. I'm pretty certain that I will likely follow the (defeasible) rule that on any search committee I'm on a candidate with a decent pub is put ahead of a candidate without a pub. For one, I don't see what's wrong with people having to spend a year or two after grad school working their way towards a TT job. For another, it seems that there are plenty of people on the market that either have managed to publish in grad school or are publishing without a TT job. I've met far too many people from fancy programs that aren't particularly talented with strong letters to back them up. I'm waiting to be impressed by a publication.
- April 8, 2009 at 11:03 PM
Anon 1044:
Uh... He asks?
- April 8, 2009 at 11:34 PM
Anon 11:03:
Thank you. I plan to publish good articles before I finish a PhD, and if I don't, no room for complaining. I just hate to see the top school crowd sneak ahead in virtue of nothing but letters from famous people.
- April 9, 2009 at 1:28 AM
re: "He asks?"
That would entail some intense interest on Leiter's part in the ferreting out of commentators, no?
- April 9, 2009 at 1:31 AM
5:49 here. It's probably impossible to defeat this impression, but I really did not mean that we interview only candidates from top-ranked programs. My point was that *no* first-time job candidate needs a publication to get an interview with my department (or with the other research-oriented department where I've worked and searched). We just aren't looking for publications, period -- at least, not from first-time candidates.
If someone has been out of grad school a few years, there would be the assumption that they are now trying to publish. So 'have they published yet?' would be a reasonable question. But we just don't care about publications for first-time seekers at all.
How do we decide whom to interview, then? We actually read as many writing samples as we can, and try to assess candidates' philosophical promise. And we have recently interviewed candidates from a wide range of programs whose work we liked. 'But hey, no pubs!' is a criticism we would almost never make. (Again, the exception is a candidate who has been kicking around visiting positions for a few years. There we do want to see a publication or two, or at least signs (e.g. reports of promising r&rs from recommenders) that the candidate will soon be publishing.)
But don't listen to me. It may be that my department and those of friends I talk to (who more or less have my attitude) are in a tiny minority. Looking at how Spiros and others have responded, I think that must be true.
- April 9, 2009 at 2:31 AM
- Spiros said...
Anon 1:31:
No. The case you point to is one in which there was a question about whether a commentator here was the same commentator who had been disruptive (and exceedingly hostile) on Professor Leiter's blog.
Please take your detective routine elsewhere.
- April 9, 2009 at 8:54 AM
- Brian Leiter said...
Professor Auxier, I have to confess that I really am beginning to think you're nuts. Why would you think those who signed Heck's letter are my "enemies"? I guess you are (thanks for letting me know!), but, as I've noted before, most of those who signed the Heck letter did so without either reading it carefully or thinking about it, many have told me they regretted it, many have since participated in PGR surveys, some are now my friends and colleagues, some I've done professional work with subsequently, and so on. Many had the reasonable objection at the time that the PGR needed to be less under my control, and have more input, given how influential it had become, a concern that I think we've addressed fairly successfully, with the Advisory Board and the increase in the total number and diversity of evaluators.
What in the world do I "stand for" to which anyone might object "on principle"? I stand for, inter alia, the value of helping students make informed decisions about where to get a PhD; for the importance of Nietzsche; for the correctness of legal positivism; for the philosophoical interest of American Legal Realism; for moral anti-realism; and so on. Which of these, exactly, demands a brave man of "conscience" such as yourself to come forward?
The puzzle raised by your comments is their extreme and somewhat irrational hostility together with the bizarre declamations, such as that I or Spiros would obviously prefer to be you. This looks less like a person of "conscience" and "principle" than someone with a psychological disturbance.
By the way, and I hope this isn't too hard for you to understand, the PGR is not a "popularity contest": it is a survey of a diverse group of hundreds of philosophers asking them for their expert opinion about the quality of philosophical work by their colleagues. Do you think tenure reviews or refereeing articles for journals are "popularity contests"? I would hope not.
Anyway, Spiros, sorry that you've been invaded by this man of "principle" and "conscience" and that your thread got derailed. And Professor Auxier, unlike you, I actually am indifferent to whether I have enemies. Sometimes one ought to have enemies, though it is better and more interesting to have worthy ones.
As to how I was able to identify certain juvenile commenters on another thread: an astute reader pointed out to me that with the site meter here one can, in fact, tie certain comments, based on their time, with IP address information. It's a neat trick.
- April 9, 2009 at 9:45 AM
On A vs B vs C journals: Is there any consensus on how to carve Leiter's recent ranking into As, Bs, and Cs? The ranked list of about 30 is here:
- April 9, 2009 at 10:08 AM
Further derailment:
Brian writes: "most of those who signed the Heck letter did so without either reading it carefully or thinking about it"
You must be kidding, Brian! Look, you aren't my enemy. I have friendly feelings for you. I do admire some of what you're doing for the profession (as I've told you in personal email). But I signed that letter because I agreed with most of it. Do you really think I'm in the minority on this score?
Maybe I am, but that would surprise me. And I doubt you know that I am. Why can't it just be the case that we disagree about this stuff? (It's old news anyway, and I'm no longer inclined to press the criticisms.)
That said, you're not the one misbehaving on this thread... (It's truly painful to see members of the profession self-destruct like this. Let's all just avert our eyes...)
- April 9, 2009 at 10:13 AM
- Spiros said...
Anon 10:13
Same Anon as the one claiming to be Randall or not?
- April 9, 2009 at 10:53 AM
- Brian Leiter said...
To Anon 10:13 (who can't be Auxier):
I take your point that there is another category here, namely, those who signed the Heck letter because they agreed with its content but who are also not my enemies (and that, Spiros, is why this anon can't be Auxier, since this point defeats Auxier's attempt to make my "enemies" list longer than it actually is!).
I may, indeed, be wrong that the majority of signatories of the Heck letter did not share its stated concerns; I developed that impression from correspondence and conversations with many signatories (three or four dozen) in which it became clear that their concerns were different than Heck's, but the letter was an easy way to make known, "I have a concern." I am also inclined, as a matter of charity of interpretation, to think that the majority did not actually endorse Heck's arguments, since his arguments against the PGR were not good ones, as I explained in some detail at the time (indeed, it was my response that led some other signatories to come forward and say that their objections were different). Anyway, I agree the matter is now ancient history and not worth debating on the merits any longer.
- April 9, 2009 at 11:41 AM
- Spiros said...
Prof. Leiter,
I saw the incongruity between the anon 10:13 and the stuff posted by R.A., but I've also noted that some posters apparently do not value consistency, and are prone to backpedaling.
- April 9, 2009 at 12:01 PM
Brian and Spiros,
I'm 10:13, and I thought it would be clear that I'm not R.A., since I said that R.A. was misbehaving and indeed has "self-destructed" in this thread. Rereading, I see that it's possible to read that remark as saying that Spiros was the misbehaving one -- but that's not what I meant at all.
Thanks for the explanation, Brian. Maybe you're right. I found it a tad insulting for you to say that most signers signed irresponsibly or thoughtlessly, but having pointed that out I'm happy to let it go. If I see you in Vancouver I'll identify myself as the poster -- since I'm typing this from O'Hare maybe I'll see you at the gate!
My aim in intervening here is just to note that there are some -- as far as I can tell, lots -- of people in the profession who are perfectly capable of disagreeing about this sort of issue (i.e. the one misleadingly framed in terms of 'popularity contests') without making it personal.
- April 9, 2009 at 2:16 PM
- Spiros said...
Anon 2:16:
Thanks for the clarification. I was just making sure the tacit implication wasn't that I was the one misbehaving. Cheers!
- April 9, 2009 at 3:09 PM
- Brian Leiter said...
Anonymous at O'Hare:
Thanks for the follow-up, points taken. I should not have acceded to Professor Auxier's original assumption that a signatory to the Heck letter is my "enemy" (though we know now that at least one signatory was and is!).
I'm afraid I'm not going to be in Vancouver, though I wish I were!
- April 9, 2009 at 4:15 PM
- Calion said...
You know, it's really really funny to watch established, professional philosophers (three of them, no less!) practice the fine art of Internet trolling...
- April 10, 2009 at 12:26 AM
- Spiros said...
I wasn't aware that it was conceptually possible for one to troll one's own blog... Neither was I aware that responding to unwarranted insults counts as trolling. Thanks for teaching me these things.
And I'm pleased to hear you're amused. That's important to me.
- April 10, 2009 at 10:53 AM
- Calion said...
Oh, it's definitely possible to troll--or perhaps we should here use the term flame-bait as possibly marginally more accurate--your own blog. I've seen people set up forums and maillists for what would seem to be the specific purpose of attracting people in order to attack them and start off-topic flamewars.
- April 11, 2009 at 1:32 PM
The poster above is confused. If you own the blog and are posting as the blog-owner, you're not a troll.
If I catch your sarcasm, you're also right to dismiss the description under which the regrettable element of thread is the product of THREE people acting like fools. The fool here is the anon who began the foolishness.
But I was writing to thank for this thread (the parts not devoted to foolishness). I found this discussion helpful.
- April 11, 2009 at 2:39 PM
When you say that a pub in a C journal hurts, is that in general or just for peer-reviewed articles? So, it seems like good advice for grad students not to submit their work to C journals. What about for co-authoring an invited article with faculty or a not-so-prestigious conference proceedings volume? I can't imagine that these will get you a job, but I also wouldn't have thought they would hurt.
- April 11, 2009 at 8:15 PM
- Neil said...
I think that as a blanket statement, it's not true that a publication in a C journal hurts. I don't even think that a publication in a C journal fails to help. It depends on the field. In some fields - I'm thinking especially of applied ethics, but there may be others - there are A journals but space in them is so limited that it is expected you will publish elsewhere. And 'elsewhere' means a C journal. In applied ethics, 'Ethics' and PPA are obviously one's first choice, but they publish very little in the way of applied ethics. Publishing in a C journal is therefore quite acceptable. It is different in M & E, meta-ethics, and other core areas: there if you fail to get into Phil Review or whatever, there are plenty of B venues, such that publication in the Zazak Journal of Interesting Stuff is seen as evidence you failed to get into the Bs/
- April 11, 2009 at 8:21 PM
One way that a publication in a C journal could hurt, particularly if someone is going onto the job market for the first time, is if the paper in question is a flaming piece of crap. The Chair of my department has brought this to the attention of the graduate students a couple of times. Deep enough into the hiring process, an SC member could google a prospective hire, and committing something terrible to print could follow one around for awhile.
- April 12, 2009 at 3:41 PM
Question. Suppose I know who my referee is because they used google to discover my identity from their office computer and this showed up in my blog's stat counter. Suppose they are taking longer than they should to complete their review. Is it inappropriate to email them and ask them politely to get a move on? It was 12 months for the first round of reviews to be completed and they've had the revised manuscript for 3 months now.
Grumpy epistemologist
- April 12, 2009 at 6:49 PM
- Spiros said...
Grumpy Epistemologist:
I'd definitely not breach the assumption of blind review. Write a grumpy note to the editor reminding him/her of the timeline.
- April 13, 2009 at 6:22 PM
- Spiros said...
Anon 8:15:
I'd keep away from invited pieces unless you also have single-authored stuff that has passed peer-review.
- April 13, 2009 at 6:24 PM
Been thinking about some of this old conversation here. Try this on for size...Spiros=Randall Auxier
People, come on--why haven't we considered this possibility yet?
I'd say let's have a beer in Carbondale when I'm there, but I';d never go near that shit-hole of a town.
- May 2, 2009 at 3:58 PM
This is saddening. I've seen Randy Auxier often at conferences. He is a decent and presentable person... not someone who could write the things that have been written under his name here.
- May 13, 2009 at 4:16 AM
No, personalist. I've seen Randy Auxier at conferences, too, and he's a petty and stupid person. That the person posting as Randy is petty and stupid doesn't mean he's Randy, but we've at least met a necessary condition.
If the person posting as Randy is in fact not Randy, then this person has done Randy a real disservice, because this person has been defaming someone whose career is already in the toilet. Enough, already, the dead dog kicking has become morbid. Oh, and Library of Living Philosophers is effectively defunct, because of incompetent editing.
- May 27, 2009 at 1:04 AM
- 徐若瑄Vivian said...
- April 6, 2010 at 12:06 AM


text:
Station Q Seminars Fall 2013
Our seminar takes place on Tuesdays at 2:30pm in our seminar room (Elings Hall 2250), unless otherwise noted below.
Fall 2013 schedule
- 08/13 and 08/14 (9-11m and 1-3pm): Cirprian Manolescu, UCLA
The triangulation conjecture
- 10/01: Mike Zaletel, UC Berkeley
Exact matrix product states for the quantum Hall effect - from conformal block wave functions to tensor networks
- 10/03: Matthew Gilbert, UIUC
Interplay between Topology and Superconductivity in 2D Time-Reversal Invariant Insulators
- 10/04 (11:00 am): Ravin Bhatt, Princeton
Anderson model of localization: Has the fat lady sung yet?
- 10/08: Titus Neupert, Princeton
Fractional Chern insulators in doped irradiated grapheme
- 10/22: Curt von Keyserlingk, Oxford
Exactly solvable models of topological matter in 3D
- 10/30 (2:00 pm): Mike Freedman, Station Q
Ginzburg-Landau superconductivity with exotic covariant derivatives
- 10/31: Shivaji Sondhi, Princeton
Non-equilibrium topological matter
- 11/05: Pavel Ioselevich, Landau Institute
Tunneling into a Majorana fermion
- 11/12: Jeffrey Teo, UIUC
Twist Defects in Topological Systems with Anyonic Symmetries
- 11/13 (11am): Gideon Wachtel, Hebrew University, Jerusalem
Critical temperature enhancement in a composite superconductor
- 11/19: Yang-Le Wu, Princeton
Quantum Hall Wave Functions: Lattice Models and Non-Abelian Quasiholes


text:
Relax by the fireplace in winter or enjoy a refreshing cocktail in the bar and lounge area or next to the swimming pool. 101 at Protea invites diners with an elegant ambient feel. An excellent menu is available that serves dishes to suit all palates. Along with a wide varieties of wines to choose from, the gourmet cuisine remains unpretentious and tasteful.
Afrique offers outstanding food, service and hospitality. This upmarket fine dining experience can be found in the acclaimed Afrique Boutique Hotel and is a must for special occasions. The menu offers great food, from contemporary mains to light meals and breakfasts. A wide selection of beverages are also available. THe restaurant serves as a great venue for private functions as well.
Altissimo serves a variety of cuisine in an ambient, relaxed setting. Diners can enjoy a casual yet stylish vibe, with food that is served with a touch of glamorous flare. Breakfast, lunch and dinner can be enjoyed and coffee and other beverages are available. Feel free to go in casual attire, kick back, enjoy great food, and just breathe out.
This fine dining restaurant offers contemporary cuisine with all the bells and whistles. The beautiful interior creates a tranquil, elegant space in which you can enjoy one of the many gourmet dishes on the menu. Excellent, professional service and an amazing wine collection add to the cuisine to make this an experience to remember. Please enquire about corkage fees.
Fresh dishes made from scratch with a healthy dollop of imagination is the order of the day here. The food is hearty with a touch of gourmet. Try a personalized breakfast that will keep you going all day, or a Mediterranean platter for one or to share. Freshly made flatbread, hummus and pesto complement the dishes; be sure to try the calamari with a touch of chilli. A variety of desserts are available and the carrot cake is definitely worth a mention. A good wine selection is on offer.
Bistro ALLEE BLEUE offers innovative bistro cuisine using local seasonal produce and ingredients sourced from the estate's gardens and local wine lands.
The comprehensive menu boasts typical South African delicacies and top class ALLEE BLEUE wines in a stylish atmosphere brimming with charm.
Savour bistro delights and exceptional service at this classic contemporary bistro in Groot Drakenstein.
This microbrewery has four unique beers on tap and a stunning restaurant in a country setting. The Black Horse Restaurant has a small a la carté menu with some kiddies' options, as well as a separate pizza menu.
Breakfast is served until 11 am and consists of three choices namely continental, the three egg omlette or the Balck Horse Full Breakfast for the hungry. The starter dishes, although limited, covers all weather types; in winter start with a cream of oyster mushroom soup, in spring try the smoked salmon carpaccio, or in summer begin with the village salad.
The mains comprise of steak, chicken, prawns or pasta while the special dishes include kudu loin and chicken, leek and macadamia nut cream pie. End your meal with a mouthwatering dessert.
The pizza menu comprises seven pizza types and a handful of snack options.
The setting is relaxed and the garden is a great place to enjoy a tasty meal with family and friends.
Trading hours:
Wednesday to Saturday - 8 am until late;
Sundays - 8 am to 7 pm;
Open on public holidays.
Share a delectable thin-based pizza with a wide variety of toppings, or treat yourself to a gourmet sandwich. For the more ravenous diner, the restaurant offers a mouthwatering vegetarian sour banana curry and many authentic Italian pasta dishes. Guests can sit indoors or outdoors, the latter offering beautiful views of the vineyards and the on-site lake. There is a kids play area and shallow water so you can enjoy a glass of wine and peace of mind on sauntering summer days.
Enjoy amazing breakfasts and lunch at Burnside Cafe, a great alternative for discerning eaters who like to indulge in something a bit different. A wide variety of dishes are available and menu items range from delicious crumpets with decadent toppings, healthy but mouthwatering salads and Thai style ginger fishcakes. Great desserts are also on offer. Dinner, while only available on certain days, is a treat with gourmet cuisine that delivers in flavour.
Set amidst the beautiful plum orchards and overlooking the vineyards and the majestic Stellenbosch mountains, Café Blanc de Noir offers a rustic chic dining space and a warm, welcoming atmosphere. and the friendly staff create the perfect atmosphere for happy and relaxed dining. Enjoy great hearty gourmet breakfasts, rustic wood-fired pizzas, and desserts stemming from secret family recipes.
Café Cielo is located in the upmarket Avianto Village. The tranquil surroundings makes for an elegant and peaceful dining experience. The café is practically on the banks of the Crocodile River and serves breakfast , lunch and dinner seven days a week from 8 am until 10 pm. Delicious gourmet sandwiches, salads, burgers and a variety of grills can be enjoyed.
This stylish elegant venue reminds of a bygone era where Hollywood glamour and true beauty creates a magical Old World feel. Try the delightful Sunday buffet (only available on certain Sundays) - a feast for the eyes and taste buds. A varied a la carte menu is also offered for breakfast, lunch and dinner and the restaurant is fully licensed. Affordable prices and high quality cuisine is the order of the day. Booking is advised.
[email protected]
This great, bustling steakhouse offers a relaxed, comfortable atmosphere in which to enjoy hearty food with gourmet flare. Pastas, snacky finger foods, the famous chicken cordon bleu, grills, a variety of salads and seafood and much more can be found on the large menu. Great cocktails and other beverages are also available.
This wonderful, relatively new restaurant is situated a stone's throw from the beach in Strand and is the ideal hangout for long, lazy lunches and beautiful dinners. The menu is refreshing and creative with dishes like gourmet baguettes, original, gourmet pizzas and the favourite sharing food - sushi.
Try the bitterballen as a starter, five traditional round Dutch croquettes served with mustard, or a lovely picnic basket for two filled with a French baguette, garlic gamba's, Italian cold meat cuts, brie and gorgonzola, fig preserve, fruit, marinated olives, salad, Amsterdammertjes, sparkling wine or Ega Rooibos tea. This should be ordered two hours in advance.
The pizzas are truly unique and the breakfast pizza with free range eggs and bacon topped with Parmigiano Reggiano is a must-try.
A wide variety of coffees, teas, wines, dessert wines and sparkling wines are available.
As Carolina says: 'Buon appetito, Lekker eet, Enjoy, Bon appétit, Eet smakelijk, Selamat makan, Born up a tree!'


text:
The days are getting longer, there's new warmth in the sun and soon it'll be time to start a few seeds indoors to get ready for the gardening season ahead (hooray). So before I embark on writing about my Florida trip (the first post will be online later today and I promise there won't be even a whiff of winter), I wanted to give you a quick heads-up about Seedy Saturdays. These offer gardeners a chance to exchange or buy seeds–often heirloom or hard-to-find varieties. Even if you don't have any seeds to swap this time, it's perfectly fine to go along and see what's what and a great way to connect with other plant-mad folks in your community.
A number of events are taking place tomorrow (February 28) with more to follow. To find information on what's going on near you, contact your local garden club or the Master Gardeners group in your area, or log on to the Seeds of Diversity website at http://www.seeds.ca/ev/events.php


text:
Book your room at Crowne Plaza Newark Airport
Get an overview of this hotelComplimentary 24-hour airport shuttle service
Airport nearby
This Elizabeth hotel is just off the New Jersey Turnpike, a half-mile from Newark Liberty International Airport and 5 miles from Penn Station.
Shuttle, indoor pool
Crowne Plaza Newark Airport offers an indoor pool and complimentary wireless Internet access. Dining options include a restaurant and sports bar.
Complimentary Wi-Fi
Guestrooms at this Crowne Plaza hotel in Elizabeth, NJ, provide desks with lamps, ergonomic chairs, voice mail, and TVs with premium cable channels. Wireless Internet access is complimentary.Would you like to give us feedback? Share it! Opens in a new window
Crowne Plaza Newark Airport901 Spring St Elizabeth NJ 07201
Hotel Amenities
Hotel Amenities
This Elizabeth, New Jersey hotel is a half-mile from Newark Liberty International Airport and 2 miles from Jersey Gardens outlet mall. Complimentary 24-hour shuttle service is provided to and from the airport. Wireless Internet access is complimentary throughout the hotel.
Crowne Plaza Newark Airport has an indoor pool that is open year-round. A 24-hour fitness center includes cardio machines and exercise stations. 3 meeting rooms accommodate up to 300 people. A restaurant, a lounge/sports bar, and a 24-hour coffee shop are also on site.
- 24-hour front desk
- Free airport transportation
- ATM/banking
- Bar/lounge
- Breakfast available (surcharge)
- Coffee shop or café
- Free newspapers in lobby
- Concierge services
- Conference space
- Conference space size (feet) - 3630
- Dry cleaning/laundry service
- Elevator/lift
- Express check-out
- Fitness facilities
- Free WiFi
- Grocery/convenience store
- Indoor pool
- Laundry facilities
- Long-term parking (surcharge)
- Luggage storage
- Multilingual staff
- Number of floors - 11
- Number of meeting rooms - 2
- Porter/bellhop
- Restaurant
- Safe-deposit box at front desk
- Self parking (surcharge)
- Smoke-free property
- Total number of rooms - 260
- Wedding services
- Wired (high-speed) Internet access - surcharge
Family Friendly Amenities
- Free Wi-Fi
- Grocery/convenience store
- Indoor pool
- Laundry facilities
- Rollaway/extra beds available
Available in all rooms: Free WiFi
Available in some public areas: Free WiFi , Wired (high-speed) Internet access - surcharge
Long-term parking (surcharge), Self parking (surcharge)
Room Amenities
- Air conditioning
- Blackout drapes/curtains
- Cable TV service
- Coffee/tea maker
- Free toiletries
- Cribs/infant beds available
- Desk
- Flat-panel TV
- Free WiFi
- Hair dryer
- Iron/ironing board
- Pay movies
- Phone
- Premium TV channels
- Rollaway/extra beds available
- Room service (limited hours)
Where to Eat
Crowne Plaza Café - Serves traditional American fare in a casual atmosphere. At night the tables are set with tablecloths and candles. Open for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.
Terrace Lounge - Lounge and sports bar. Offers lunch and dinner in an intimate bar setting on a raised area inside the restaurant. Seating at the bar or at small tables. Open from midday until midnight.
Café Bistro - 24-hour coffee shop. Serves Seattle's Best Coffee, pastries, sandwiches, soups, pastas, and pizza.
Nearby Things to Do
- Hiking/biking trails nearby
To make requests for specific accessibility needs, complete the "Special or Accessibility Requests" section of "Trip Preferences" when you book your hotel.
- Accessible bathroom
- Roll-in shower
- In-room accessibility
Hotel Policies
Check-in time starts at 3 PM
Minimum check-in age is 21
Special check-in instructions:
Check-out time is noon
Payment types
Children and extra beds
- Children are welcome.
- Rollaway/extra beds are available.
- Cribs (infant beds) are available.
- Pets not allowed
You need to know
Extra-person charges may apply and vary depending on hotel policy.
Government-issued photo identification and a credit card or cash deposit are required at check-in for incidental charges.
Special requests are subject to availability upon check-in and may incur additional charges. Special requests cannot be guaranteed.
Optional extras
- Breakfast fee: USD 10 per person (approximately)
- Self parking fee: USD 15 per night (in/out privileges)
Hotel Name
- Crowne Plaza Hotel Newark Airport
- Crowne Plaza Newark Airport
- Newark Airport Crowne Plaza
- Crowne Plaza Elizabeth
- Crowne Plaza Hotel Elizabeth
- Crowne Plaza Newark Airport Hotel Elizabeth
- Crowne Plaza Newark Airport Hotel
- Crowne Plaza Newark Airport Elizabeth


text:
Ned Yost media session: August 21
Before the Royals wrapped up their four-game series against the Boston Red Sox, manager Ned Yost discussed the effect a knuckleballer like Tim Wakefield would have on a hitter's timing over the next few games. Despite seeing a plethora of knuckleballs last night, which are much slower than the average Major League pitch, Yost doesn't seem to think his players will have trouble adjusting back to normal speed.
"It didn't mess up our timing after he [Wakefield] got out of the game, so I don't look for it to have any effect on us [today]," Yost said.
After today's 1:10 matchup against Boston, the Royals hit the road for 17 of their next 20 games. The road hasn't been kind to the Royals so far this year, as they are just 19-39, compared to 33-36 at home. Yost isn't exactly sure of the reason for such a drastic split between their home and road records, but thinks it could have something to do with the bigger park at Kauffman Stadium.
"This park plays better for our pitching staff than a smaller park. We've got more room to make mistakes with the young pitchers," Yost said. "This place allows us to run down more of those mistakes, where other parks aren't so forgiving."
Yost also said he believes some of his players are more than deserving of some accolades after the season.
"I think he [Alex Gordon] and [Alcides] Escobar both should get Gold Glove consideration, and Frenchy [Jeff Francoeur] too," Yost said. "With what our outfielders have done defensively, and with what Escobar has done defensively, I think that those guys should be given a hard look for Gold Glove."
Yost also praised Gordon for his base running, something the Royals have made a focal point. Yost said the whole team has been better about understanding how to run the bases aggressively and take an extra base whenever an opportunity presents itself.
"We've done that a lot [taking the extra base] when outfielders have hesitated for just a second," Yost said. "We're taking advantage of those situations, and Alex does it really, really well."