Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!ames!dftsrv!amarna.gsfc.nasa.gov!pease
From: pease@amarna.gsfc.nasa.gov (Pease)
Newsgroups: comp.groupware
Subject: Re: Consensus Journals:Nonexistent journals based upon peer consensus
Message-ID: <3964@dftsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Date: 20 Nov 90 17:42:31 GMT
References: <1990Nov8.181047.17406@daimi.aau.dk> <27172@cs.yale.edu> <5802@stpstn.UUCP> <18637@ultima.socs.uts.edu.au>
Sender: news@dftsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov
Reply-To: pease@amarna.gsfc.nasa.gov
Organization: NASA Goddard Space Flight Center - Greenbelt, MD, USA
Lines: 33
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.3-4

>In article >27172@cs.yale.edu> yarvin-norman@cs.yale.edu (Norman Yarvin) writes:
><dsstodol@daimi.aau.dk (David S. Stodolsky) writes:
><> A statistical 
><>procedure is used to identify the most 
><>knowledgeable representative of each 
><>consensus position...
><
><Then your method is complete crap.

I've jumped into the middle of this thread, and so maybe the following remarks
are inappropriate to what is being discussed; so please forgive...

The use of what is termed the DELPHI technique for reaching a consensus was
originally to have participants vote on specified set of options with a numeric
value (1-5 or 1-10 being used) and the DELPHI program would use some
statistical techniques for ariving at the the most likely option.

The technique was then modified to have a second round of voting where
participants could change their vote after seeing the results of individual
votes from the first round.  In this variation, for the first round the voters
would also provide a value for ones expertise in the topic being considered. 
Thus for the second round of voting the participants might decide to modify
their vote based on knowledge of how those persons who considered themselves
experts on the topic voted.

There was not attempt for some person(s) to decide who was expert.  It was up
to the individual to decide for themselves as to their own level of knowledge
of the subject topic being considered.

Phil Pease 
My witty disclaimer - everything I perceive, through either sensory or
extrasensory means, has been filtered to such an extent that you had better not
attempt to attribute anything I say to anyone else.