I'm all up for amendments to the reward after handing in a provisional ones, if needed. Like, it's not a win or a scam or anything, it's an honest contribution without much of a reward except a superfluous title and good vibes.
> Levels were: AN 150, BN 250, Masters 750, Doctorate 1000 lol, our CFJs routinely go above those, we are smurt af. On Thu, Oct 26, 2017 at 7:22 PM, Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > Thanks! I'm thinking of formalizing the results of this discussion into > a rule to provide better guidance - so your general thoughts very welcome. > > Here's a brief history of our standards from 2002 when I joined: > > - When I joined, there was a word count standard that included a > progression in the form of credit for higher degrees: e.g. > The Degree of Associate of Nomic requires a Thesis of at least > 150 words. A Candidate who already holds an AN Degree receives > a credit of 100 words towards the Thesis requirement for any > higher Degree, unless the Candidate also holds a BN Degree. > Levels were: AN 150, BN 250, Masters 750, Doctorate 1000 > These are *really low* limits, and most theses blew these limits out > of the water regardless of level. > > - Then, we went to a system where we appointed an official Thesis > Advisor who would recommend a level and review very critically, > the reviews were based on content (e.g. a 1000 word limited-scope > CFJ would be "lower" than a 1000 word deep philosophical essay). > > - Then a vote where the voters had the Option of choosing any degree. > > - Now the Herald has to pick which level to award before asking for > 2 Agoran Consent - that makes it harder for voters to pick between > levels. > > > On Thu, 26 Oct 2017, Alexis Hunt wrote: > > No issues. It would be remiss of me to participate overly much in the > discussions > > of the academy in regards to my own thesis. > > > > On Thu, 26 Oct 2017 at 12:56 Kerim Aydin <ke...@u.washington.edu> wrote: > > > > > > Hi folks, > > > > I'm still struggling a bit "leveling" Alexis's thesis. By sheer > length, > > it is clearly more than a B.N. and would fit for Masters. However > > (wearing my academic review hat, seriously I just got out of a > review > > committee for a RL master's thesis), it's subject matter of the > CFJ is > > limited in scope - while very-well analyzed, as written it has > limited > > applicability or generalization outside of carefully analyzing a > set of > > rules that have now been fixed. > > > > I'm going to give 24 more hours for discussion - there's currently > no > > standards for theses in the rules. > > > > Just by word count, Masters. > > by content: B.N., but e has that already, so A.N. > > (ais523's suggestion of changing the rules to allow multiple > degrees > > at each level is a good one, but I don't want to delay the award > > further). > > > > Also: should we consider "academic progression" at all, e.g. "this > > would be a masters if you'd filled in the lower degrees first, but > > since you haven't, fill in the lower?" > > > > My apologies, Alexis, if I'm over-thinking this. I'm totally happy > > to error upwards in most things and give the higher award, but I'm > having > > a hard time getting over the "jump" in RL between undergrad and > graduate > > degree expectations in terms of the research topic being more > general than > > a specific CFJ. Since this is one of the rare Masters > candidates, the > > decision sets something of a precedent... > > > > -G. > > > > > > > > > > >
