Improving the description of tutorials so we get the kinds of articles we think are most useful

[mrshirts]

There's some question about whether we need to make the requirements for tutorials more restrictive to make people self-select not to submit if the software is not actually going to be useful. We don't necessarily want tutorials for code that is just barely leaving development, because most of those are not actually that useful to people; maybe there's some good ones there, but they are hard to find. Also, those papers are less likely to be good and require more time and energy from reviewers (reviewers like to review good papers).

• One thought is to make it explicit there should already exist some community of users, but not restricting the size of the community (i.e. a project with a community of 5 external users might end up just needing to be advertised more)

Other thoughts?

[davidlmobley]

Yes, probably making it explicit that there should be a community of users is a good option.

[mradhakr2]

...agreed.

On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 11:59 AM David L. Mobley notifications@github.com wrote:

Yes, probably making it explicit that there should be a community of users is a good option.

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/livecomsjournal/livecomsjournal.github.io/issues/203#issuecomment-754092419, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AK53CKZJFFUVZHGGGUD7TW3SYHXV7ANCNFSM4VTH5BGQ .

-- Mala L. Radhakrishnan Associate Professor of Chemistry Director, Biochemistry Program Wellesley College 106 Central Street Wellesley, MA 02481 (781)283-2981

[dmzuckerman]

agree