Barbelith Underground > Creation > The Barbelith Temple Presents: Vol 1

is art vote time. You get art vote linkage emonk?

Sept 15th is the article due date but as they come in beforehand I'm feeding them into the Editors' work queue. In a digustingly organized way I'm also tracking where each article is in the workflow so we can hand everything off to Layout.

A Brief Content Assessment Group Statement:

As has been discussed in this thread, the project's aim is to produce a high quality collection of work grounded in personal experience. Abstracts have been submitted and feedback returned, however much can change in the process of writing the articles.

When an article is received by CAG it is examined for content. Usually this means clarity of presentation (can we understand what you are trying to say) and does it meet the criteria of the Journal (practical information the audience can apply). Every effort is made and will be made to help authors reach these goals. This may require several rounds between the author and CAG.

The articles are then handed off to the Editors for further refinement. The author's project contact information is given to the assigned Editor to allow for communication regarding the nuts and bolts of style versus clarity.

/End Content Assessment Group Statement

Ok so as you might have imagined there are some questions that pop up around the above process. You may have more but here are a few and what I currently have for answers. Please view this as a collective decision making process. I'm not handing down the Law rather I'm trying to present to the group the structure we have collectively agreed upon.

1. What happens if CAG doesn't approve my article?

While every effort will be made to assist the author to produce an article both parties are happy with there is the potential of disagreement. This would require the members of CAG having the same concerns and the author deciding not to make the recommended changes.

As it is the duty of CAG to uphold the standards of the project the article would be rejected. Again this would happen after every effort was made to reach a mutually acceptable product.

2. What are the standards I have to reach anyway?

For CAG approval the article needs to have a clear goal and arrive there. It may be a recipe like approach using personal experience to outline how to perform a magical act. It may be an examination of personal practice to offer the reader deeper insights into an obscure tradition (personal or collective). Or it may be exploring how an author applies their magical philosophy to their lives. The key is the reader needs to be able to understand the objective of the article and the author needs to construct it in such a manner as to deliver the goods.

Potential problems might be inaccessible language choices, main topic derailed by too many tangents, unclear topic objective, and failing to present how the author uses or the reader may use this information. Included would also be the hot buttons of Barbelith and the Temple: lack of citing sources or giving concrete examples, and hand waving theory ungrounded in detailed actual practice.

An article with these problems will NOT be rejected out of hand. The author will be asked to change the problematic areas and suggestions/feedback will be given to assist. Only when the author decides not to apply the suggestions will rejection become a possibility.

2. How are Editors assigned?

We have three kickass volunteer Editors each with different skill sets. Articles passed by CAG are handed off based on Editor availability and special ninja/pirate skills. So it's a bit of who has not got a giant pile on their desk and who is more likely to be a good match for the author's specific ninja/pirate needs.

I'd like to say as an author submitting an article to CAG I fully expect to get a few rounds of suggestions because of where my personal skill level as a writer lives. I expect even more rounds with the Editors because of my poor grammar. Yet I do not fear rejection because I'm open to suggestions and willing to rewrite my work to achieve the standard to the project. I know it isn't a 'zine I can get into just because I sent something in.

Ok so does this seem transparent enough to everyone and are y'all cool with it?