WordPress Post Pagination

Thanks to a couple of helpful sites [1, 2]: I have learnt that it is apparently possible to paginate a single blog post. Extremely useful for long blog posts. Of course, the actual tag “Next-Page Quicktag” is not actually found on my “Write Post” interface, so I have to insert the code for “Next Page” manually to get it done. This is not a big deal, but I do wonder why they have not just included it in the interface.

Something I just felt sharing, in case others wanted to know. I have been going through some of my older posts to get some pagination done. Just to make navigation easier. I hope it does not backfire and actually make me lose the few viewers that I had because they rather not click on the “Read the rest of this entry »” links or the links to the respective paginated pages of a single blog. I guess that is why some bloggers just put up with huge posts on the “front page”: easier to scroll than to click?

On Digital Publishing and Readability

While it did start a discussion on a topic that I am interested in reading, I am not going to spend time dissecting “Reinventing academic publishing online. Part I: Rigor, relevance and practice”. However, there are two things I wish to say about this article regarding its content. The first point is that I am not going to bother reading this article (which is part 1 of their paper), but I am very much looking forward to reading part 2 of their paper.

“Huh?”

Because there are only so many “these are the problems” articles I am willing to read and comment on before I want to read nothing but “here are our/the solutions to these problems” articles. And the second point is that I think it is very ironic how more and more journals are publishing articles that talk about the limitations of the journal publishing models. And, correspondingly, how there is a need to improve them to fit with the reasonable but growing demand for a higher degree of quality, efficiency and effectivity of scholarly communication.

“Smells like “friendly” fire to me.”

Of course, in their defense: scholars generally still consider the (current) journal publishing models the best they have for scholarly communication. So scholars publishing in journals is (still) justified. And journals operating the way they currently do is also (still) justified. The latter not without growing pressure to do better, I think/hope.

Anyway, this article actually triggered a discussion on the issue of readability on FriendFeed.

“But nothing on the content itself? Awkward…”

I cannot constructively comment on the (lack of) readability of this article since I have not read it. Yet, I did notice the use of bulleted lists as I skimmed through the article, and there is something I wish to share. See, I was once told by one of my professors, as a critique on a report I submitted, that using bulleted lists was generally not recommended. Apparently, bulleted lists take the “flow” out of (reading) the text. That was a sad day for me, since I really like bulleted lists. To me, it makes reading/absorbing the information easier/faster, but I could see my professor’s point, too.

“Now you have to learn how to write better. Bummer.”

Also, they read all their stuff printed/analog, while I try to read as much (and fast) off the computer screen as I can (saves ink, printing can be expensive!). I wonder if that can make a difference, too. Maybe bulleted lists are just better for people who aren’t solely focused on reading something, while they can be an annoyance to people heavily focused on the text.

“It’s probably just the ADD kicking in for Internet Junkies like you.”

Indeed. Maybe I should just try to read more printed stuff, away from my computer.

“That is a natural progression from “IT bum” to “adult”. I guess there is still hope for you.”

Revisiting the value of blog posts and blog comments

Here is a blog post by Mike Taylor on the issue of crediting qualitative contributions of a scholarly nature titled “Yet more uninformed noodling on the future of scientific publishing and that kind of thing”. The blogosphere seems to have more of these “rating blog posts/comments” discussions lately. Considering I am replying to that blog post, I could have aptly titled this blog post something like “Citing and ranking web based scientific documents”. However, it was actually a different issue addressed in that post that compelled me to write this.

Slow Blogging versus Speedy Twittering

A bit late perhaps, but as I am chatting away with a friend who Twitters, I realize one of the benefits of Twittering over Blogging (or any other type of “authoring” really).

“Let me take an exceptionally educated guess: you not actually being a member of the Twitter community? Sounds great indeed; where do I (and, for that matter, the rest of the world) sign up?”

In your dreams and my nightmares. See, one of the principles of successful change management is to, as quickly as possible, achieve success. Reaching that milestone, no matter how small is it, will give people the feeling of being productive and useful. Reaching milestone after milestone, no matter how small they are, is an experience that strongly motivates people to (continue to) do things.

There are many times when I thought of something quick that I wanted to write about, but refrained from doing so because my mind went “I cannot just write stuff down. I will have to take my time and think about it, then write a draft, then spend quite a bit of time reviewing and rewriting that draft into a coherent and complete story”.

“Huh? When have you ever used that procedure for this blog?”

I am doing it even now. So the idea that I had to spend a lot of time to share what I felt was a very little nugget of wisdom was not exactly motivating. Which is kind of insane since blogging was the Twitter before Twitter! It was an easy outlet of whatever one wanted to say online right there and then, quick and dirty! Format be damned! But when blogging became a more serious activity for professionals, the people behind Twitter had to look for the next format where “quick and dirty” was the rule, no exceptions. By limiting it to 140 characters, they have successfully captured, no… abducted the “quick and dirty” feel and complemented it with the “repeatedly strive for quick achievements, no matter how small” concept.

No wonder they called it Twitter: it sounds and means something fast, whereas “blog” sounds slow and its definition reminds me of something slow. If there ever was an alien called “Blog”, you know it would be something big, fat, wobbling with multiple layers of whatever.

“Hey, leave the snark to me! Anyway, abducted is a strong word; I predict a new service that will have even a lower maximum limit of characters reaching great heights of popularity!”

Not an impossible theory. Still, how articulate can one be with even fewer characters? Wait, do I even want to know?

Wobbling Blogger Out.

Wobbly Update: Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems

Just a small update; I have been rather busy with stuff so I have not been able to update my blog properly. I have been and still am working on a very big blog post, though. And I guarantee you that that blog post will be very awesome. Until that time, a small update on something interesting that I have found through my FriendFeed contacts. Looks like the number of repositories have increased by one: Sprouts

Sprouts: Working Papers on Information Systems is an Open Access publication that provides a fast-turnaround outlet for authentic and original research and work-in-progress carried out by scholars of the information systems field and members of AIS, the Association for Information Systems. Sprouts is devoted to research about the ways in which information is generated and used in the prevailing complex socio-technical landscape.

Sprouts is special because it focuses on Information Systems. Which is still relatively a new field to embrace the Open Access preprint culture. I know Social Science Research Network has a special section for (working) papers on Information Systems, but having one specifically for Information Systems sends a stronger signal in terms of recognizing the value of OA preprints. At least in my opinion anyway.

Interesting progress for the Open Access theme!

A new category: Poking At New Research

Blog Abstract
To keep up with (random) new research, find new material to blog about and practice my skills to poke at said research, a new category for this blog, aptly named “Poking At New Research”, is created. The first entry in this category is an article that focuses on the effects of intentional pain.

Segregation Of Duties: Authors & Journal Editors

Journal Editors can be practicing researchers as well. A good example of that would be the Editor-in-Chief of Chaos, Solitons & Fractals: M.S. El Naschie. Normally, I would say that if he can do research, write papers and have them published while also working as a journal editor somewhere at the same time: more power to him.

Of course, this can get a bit ickier when many of his papers are actually published in “his” own journal. I mean, he is the guy with the final say on what is apparently good enough to be published and what not. Where is the accountability when it comes to his publications? Obviously, he likes to have his papers published, and since he has the power to accept them for publication, I would say that there are accountability issues here.

Ed Alleyne-Johnson – Orange (Live Busking In Chester, UK)

Not as famous as the others I have referred to from my blog, but he is definitely amazing on the electric guitar violin. Ed Alleyne Johnson is a famous busker in UK. Here is one of my favorite songs, “Orange”, from his cd “Ultraviolet” performed live.

Fuel Grows On Trees!

Scientists discover Patagonian diesel that grows on trees

A tree fungus could provide green fuel that can be pumped directly into vehicle tanks, US scientists say. The organism, found in the Patagonian rainforest, naturally produces a mixture of chemicals that is remarkably similar to diesel.

“So money does grow on trees!”

Of course, now we have to figure out how we can mass grow this stuff to be able to support an energy consuming creatures like us and our inventions. I wonder if that is possible? I hope so, because that would be amazing. If nothing else, it sounds like there is all the more reason to research these kind of alternatives more thoroughly. This is definitely good news! Think of all the good it can do if it can be mass produced or something like that! Hybrid vehicle technologies are going to like this news!

Wobbly Update: On FriendFeed And The Value Of Blogging (Again)

I just wanted to say that I am also active on FriendFeed since not too long ago. And this might not come as a surprise to you, but I am using the same nick (Wobbler). I think it is a pretty fun and useful concept to get in touch with people and things they share. Much like RSS but with room to provide short comments. So that is nice. Seems like scholars are starting to use Twitter as well. I do not think I care enough for Twitter to use that now, but maybe later?

“Scholars and IT, way to reinforce a stereotype.”

Oh well, onto a slightly more relevant bit of information then. Thanks to FriendFeed, I came across a blog post on Why Academics Should Blog by Hugh McGuire. He is mostly presenting some good points, although the accreditation and relevancy issues remain unsolved. Well, that is my opinion anyway. I am not going to repeat my junk here, you can read it in his comment section.

On a related note, here is another topical discussion (and even a real life example!) on DrugMonkey’s blog about scholars using blogs to get things done.

“Hah, way to make your case.”

Hey, I stand by my views. I think there is a place for blogging to improve scholarly communication. Just not for large settings without significant improvements on its format (and thus its efficiency). And when that time comes, if ever, I imagine it will resemble digital research papers more than blogs. Ah well, maybe more of those predictions later.