Typical thoughts I turn to for the annual editorial in Computing Reviews are such things as coverage, scope, or extra features. This time, let’s set those sorts of things aside and get down to something even more basic to our efforts: our base of reviewers! Not to forget the oft-repeated mantra in our offices, “Reviewers are the real authors of Computing Reviews.”
The set of active reviewers is something that requires tending, almost like a garden. Part of such tending entails the day-to-day interactions of editorial staff with these individuals—especially the newest reviewers—as we try to insure that our editorial guidelines for a publishable review are understood and adhered to. But we also strive to keep that reviewer base refreshed and renewed with qualified people. Those are individuals, whether based in industry or in academe, who have concluded that written commentary on published work is indeed a service to the community. Not only does it help the reviewer stay in touch with today’s literature, but it also helps save the time of others.
We do indeed welcome the new reviewers—some 60 to 75 of them who responded to our call across US institutions to sign up and try their hand at this kind of commentary. The response yielded reviewers from colleges and universities of varying size, and also people working in large corporate enterprises and labs. The geographic mix of reviewers, both internationally and US based, remains impressive.
And, of course, many thanks to the Computing Reviews staff for their many hours well spent seeding and cultivating this “garden.”
Editor in Chief