4 ms·
Riffing on "mail-only", I'd further suggest: - Include a printout of the story in the submission packet (shipping costs) - Also require a signed (and perhaps
by ericbarrett 4y ago
Riffing on "mail-only", I'd further suggest:
- Include a printout of the story in the submission packet (shipping costs)
- Also require a signed (and perhaps notarized) affidavit stating that it's entirely the author's own work*
- Require a header/submission form to be filled out by hand (this can be verified quickly with a magnifying glass)
It's not perfect; the story could still be generated by AI, for example, and autopens exist. But it would put a very manual cost and effort barrier in front of their submission process, that IMO is still not so high as to discourage legitimate entrants.
* Obviously this should be informed by legal counsel, I am not a lawyer, etc.
- ghaff 4y agoAs someone who has been on a lot of conference committees, I wouldn't necessarily require proposals to be sent physically; that would create a lot of work for us. But I do favor limiting the # per person and asking questions other than just the standard abstract that might discourage people who are just spamming everything in sight. Friction isn't always a bad thing.
- ericbarrett 4y agoI don't know that the extra work will be avoidable in the future. I think anything with a public API is going to be gamed and spammed.