Yildiz to Harvard, Fudenberg to MIT, Manea to NYU, me to Princeton.
me=?
Senior Theory Moves & Offers
-
seriously, how is this not an issue?
non theorist here. Yariiv looks like everything that is wrong with the profession. 9 years out, no top papers, yet gets to the AER Board of editors. Ever since then gets 4 AERs while holding to the position. Seriously? are these your 'stars'?
-
It's not an issue because you simply don't know what you're talking about. She has some beautiful papers and is a really great colleague. It's not her fault you're too dumb to simply read them and find out for yourself.
Shut your mouth and get back to your psets and mindless regressions.
seriously, how is this not an issue?
non theorist here. Yariiv looks like everything that is wrong with the profession. 9 years out, no top papers, yet gets to the AER Board of editors. Ever since then gets 4 AERs while holding to the position. Seriously? are these your 'stars'?
-
Oh I see, if a paper by a student Of Acemoglu gets a paper in ECMA, if Pistaferri sits at the board of editors while a coauthor of his publishes or someone at the JFE has a family relation to an author, all hell breaks loose and rightly so. But if an editor submits a paper to its own journal then it's fine because she's a great colleague and her papers are beautiful. Double standards much?
And by the way, I'm a senior editor at a field journal where we worry about these things.
It's not an issue because you simply don't know what you're talking about. She has some beautiful papers and is a really great colleague. It's not her fault you're too dumb to simply read them and find out for yourself.
Shut your mouth and get back to your psets and mindless regressions.seriously, how is this not an issue?
non theorist here. Yariiv looks like everything that is wrong with the profession. 9 years out, no top papers, yet gets to the AER Board of editors. Ever since then gets 4 AERs while holding to the position. Seriously? are these your 'stars'?
-
yes, it also means she knows who the referees that could reject her papers and make sure they don't publish under her. funny enough 80% of her pubs since she got in there are AERs and AEJs, where she has access to the backed of the journals. if you dont't think that's unethical you're out of your mind.
yariv is bard of editors at aer. means she has towrite about 10 referee reports per year. of corse she canstill submit her own papers there, just like any other frequent referee.
-
If the paper belongs. Maybe you should actually be a scientist and read the work.
I understand your point, but she's a friend of mine and your accusations struck a nerve. Anyone that knows her knows she has integrity.
The Acemoglu comparison is not fitting, because he does it for clearly mediocre papers that would be passed at any other top 5
Oh I see, if a paper by a student Of Acemoglu gets a paper in ECMA, if Pistaferri sits at the board of editors while a coauthor of his publishes or someone at the JFE has a family relation to an author, all hell breaks loose and rightly so. But if an editor submits a paper to its own journal then it's fine because she's a great colleague and her papers are beautiful. Double standards much?
And by the way, I'm a senior editor at a field journal where we worry about these things.It's not an issue because you simply don't know what you're talking about. She has some beautiful papers and is a really great colleague. It's not her fault you're too dumb to simply read them and find out for yourself.
Shut your mouth and get back to your psets and mindless regressions.seriously, how is this not an issue?
non theorist here. Yariiv looks like everything that is wrong with the profession. 9 years out, no top papers, yet gets to the AER Board of editors. Ever since then gets 4 AERs while holding to the position. Seriously? are these your 'stars'?
-
I'm sorry but this doesn't work like that. this is an institutional design thing, rules and incentives, not a soap opera with lots of swearing by "the integrity of your friend" who can do no harm while others are the big bad wolves with "mediocre friends". this is not a high school playground, this is a process that makes or breaks careers and as such editors should not publish in their own journals, period. I'm done here
If the paper belongs. Maybe you should actually be a scientist and read the work.
I understand your point, but she's a friend of mine and your accusations struck a nerve. Anyone that knows her knows she has integrity.
The Acemoglu comparison is not fitting, because he does it for clearly mediocre papers that would be passed at any other top 5Oh I see, if a paper by a student Of Acemoglu gets a paper in ECMA, if Pistaferri sits at the board of editors while a coauthor of his publishes or someone at the JFE has a family relation to an author, all hell breaks loose and rightly so. But if an editor submits a paper to its own journal then it's fine because she's a great colleague and her papers are beautiful. Double standards much?
And by the way, I'm a senior editor at a field journal where we worry about these things.It's not an issue because you simply don't know what you're talking about. She has some beautiful papers and is a really great colleague. It's not her fault you're too dumb to simply read them and find out for yourself.
Shut your mouth and get back to your psets and mindless regressions. -
I'm sorry but this doesn't work like that. this is an institutional design thing, rules and incentives, not a soap opera with lots of swearing by "the integrity of your friend" who can do no harm while others are the big bad wolves with "mediocre friends". this is not a high school playground, this is a process that makes or breaks careers and as such editors should not publish in their own journals, period. I'm done here
If the paper belongs. Maybe you should actually be a scientist and read the work.
I understand your point, but she's a friend of mine and your accusations struck a nerve. Anyone that knows her knows she has integrity.
The Acemoglu comparison is not fitting, because he does it for clearly mediocre papers that would be passed at any other top 5Oh I see, if a paper by a student Of Acemoglu gets a paper in ECMA, if Pistaferri sits at the board of editors while a coauthor of his publishes or someone at the JFE has a family relation to an author, all hell breaks loose and rightly so. But if an editor submits a paper to its own journal then it's fine because she's a great colleague and her papers are beautiful. Double standards much?
And by the way, I'm a senior editor at a field journal where we worry about these things.It's not an issue because you simply don't know what you're talking about. She has some beautiful papers and is a really great colleague. It's not her fault you're too dumb to simply read them and find out for yourself.
Shut your mouth and get back to your psets and mindless regressions.it does not work like this: a member of the board is just a reliable referee that will provide reports in time: no access to any system or anything, you are just expected to provide n timely reports per year, fullstops. This is the way it works at the larger journals. It may well be different from the one you edit, as typically in those journals associate editors get e.g. to choose the referees, but not at the AER.
-
she's board of editors at the aer, not a co-editor. that means she has to write about 10 referee reports per year. that's it, she has no access to the system, nor are her own submissions to the aer handled in any special way.
the posters here apparently don't know at all what they are talking about. you seriously want to install a rule saying that you can't publish in a journal for which you regularly referee?