
Now that the registration for the Science Blogging Conference is open, it is time to remind you that the new edition of the Science Blogging Anthology, “Open Laboratory 2007”, is in the works and is accepting your suggestions.
Although the entire process, from the initial idea all the way to having a real book printed and up for sale, took only about a month, the Open Laboratory 2006 was a great success. This year, we have much more time so we hope we will do an even better job of it.
More than 100 entries have come in so far (see under the fold) and we are looking for more. I have read them all and written my annotations about each, while Reed Cartwright is in the process of reading them closely as we speak. In the end, he will be the final aribiter of which 50 posts, plus one poem and one cartoon, will make it into the anthology. Think of me as a ‘series editor’ and Reed as the ‘2007 editor’.
As we are bloggers, we like transparency. As much as the automated submission form makes our lives easy, we decided that it would be best if, like last year, we made the list of entries public. That way, you can all see them, read them, comment about them, and see what is missing and needs to be entered before the deadline comes (December 20th 2007).
Please, use the submission form to enter your submissions (i.e., putting a link in the comments of this post will not do you any good) and pick up the code for the cool badges (like the one on top of this post) here to help us spread the word.
As I wrote earlier:
Clicking on the button will take you to the submission form. Reed and I will get e-mail notification every time there is a new entry and we will read them all and jot down some ‘notes to self’. Since we have ten months to do this, we will not need a jury of 12 bloggers to help us read all the entries, but do not be surprised if we ask you to vet/factcheck/peer-review a post that is in your domain of expertise (and not ours) later in the year.
So, go back to December 20th, 2006 and start looking through your archives as well as archives of your favourite science bloggers and look for real gems – the outstanding posts. Many have been written recently for the “Science Only Week”, or for the “Basic Terms and Concepts” collection.
Try to look for posts that cover as many areas of science blogging as posssible: mathematics, astronomy, cosmology, physics, chemistry, earth science, atmospheric/climate science, marine science, biochemistry, genetics, molecular/cellular/developmental biology, anatomy/physiology, behavior, ecology, paleontology, evolution, psychology, anthropology, archaeology, and/or history of science, philosophy of science, sociology of science, science ethics and rhetorics, science communication and education, the business of science, the Life in Academia (from undergraduate, graduate, postdoc, faculty or administrative perspective), politics of science, science and pseudoscience, science and religion, etc.
Also, try to think of different post formats: essays, personal stories, poems, polemics, fiskings, textbook-style prose, etc. For now, let’s assume that color images cannot make it into the book (I’ll let you know if that changes) and certainly copyrighted (by others) material is a No-No. Posts that are too heavily reliant on multiple links are difficult to turn into hardcopy as well. Otherwise, write and submit stuff and hopefully one of your posts will make it into the Best 50 Science Posts of 2007 and get published!
Under the fold are the entries so far. About half have been submitted by authors, the rest by readers. I hope you don’t need to ask us to remove an entry of yours, but if that is the case (e.g., you intend to include it in your own book), please contact me about it.
Reading all the entries so far will help you think of other posts, yours or others’, that may fit in here. Perhaps a big story of this year is not covered in any of the submissions so far. Perhaps you remember a post which covers a story better than the entry we already have. Have we missed a really popular post that everyone loved and linked to?
Also, if you are an expert in an area and you have BIG problems with one of the entries in your field, please let us know soon so we can send it out for further peer-review. As was the case last year, only English-language posts are eligible. If you have written an awesome post in another language, please make a GOOD translation available before submission.
I will occasionally update this post as new entries keep coming in, so keep coming back every week or so to see what is new. The entries are arranged in alphabetical order of the name of the blog (because all attempts at categorization failed), which makes it easy to get my own out of the way first, and let you go on quickly to see all the really cool writers of the science blogosphere. If a blog has multiple contributors, the author of the submitted post(s) is named in parentheses.
Continue reading →