From 4e63fc6a24a22bef888af24709aabed9889414ef Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "J.-S. Caux" <J.S.Caux@uva.nl> Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2019 09:35:08 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Tweak by-laws --- scipost/templates/scipost/EdCol_by-laws.html | 12 ++++++++---- 1 file changed, 8 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/scipost/templates/scipost/EdCol_by-laws.html b/scipost/templates/scipost/EdCol_by-laws.html index 0f05891ca..1ab293587 100644 --- a/scipost/templates/scipost/EdCol_by-laws.html +++ b/scipost/templates/scipost/EdCol_by-laws.html @@ -419,7 +419,7 @@ is made visible to all non-conflicted Fellows. </p> <p> - A number of Fellows (depending on the Journal) is selected by Editorial Administration and specifically given voting rights on the recommendation. This selection is made to ensure sufficient expertise, enforce checks on impartiality and avoid conflicts of interest. Other qualified Fellows can claim voting rights on the recommendation if they so wish, by contacting Editorial Administration (in the interest of workflow control, not all Fellows are expected to vote on all recommendations, but rather only on the ones they are given voting rights on). + A number of Fellows (depending on the Journal) is selected by Editorial Administration and specifically given voting rights on the recommendation. This selection is made to ensure sufficient expertise, enforce checks on impartiality and avoid conflicts of interest. Other qualified Fellows can claim voting rights on the recommendation if they so wish, by contacting Editorial Administration. </p> <p> The voting Fellows cast their opinion on the recommendation. They can: @@ -430,8 +430,9 @@ </ul> </p> <p> - The result of the vote is determined by strict majority of non-abstaining - Fellows. + The result of the vote is determined by strict majority of + non-abstaining Fellows, the acceptance quorum (minimal number of + agreeing Fellows) depending on the Journal (e.g. 4 for flagship, 3 for Core). </p> <p> When agreeing with a recommendation for publication, voting Fellows @@ -451,7 +452,10 @@ which recommendation(s) they would support; they can alternately specify that they think previous referees should be reconsulted, or that new referees should be found (this can happen in particular when a voting - Fellow disagrees with a direct recommendation). + Fellow disagrees with a direct recommendation). These alternative + recommendations are taken into account to fix the College decision or + by the Editor-in-charge if they with to reformulate the recommendation + (see detailed explanations below). </p> <p> For example, a voting Fellow can disagree with a recommendation to -- GitLab