[adaptivegenome]

I am clearly overcommitted elsewhere to work on these queries, sorry for dropping that ball...unfortunately there is no easy way (that I know of, but happy to take suggestions) to give read-only access to the db for people to play with queries. If you have suggestions let me know...I don't know vBulletin's tables well enough to put together the requisite queries.... :/

Rather than grant access to the DB can you simply dump every post to a text file and share that? We can work from the text file to capture the necessary data.

[ECO]

I am clearly overcommitted elsewhere to work on these queries, sorry for dropping that ball...unfortunately there is no easy way (that I know of, but happy to take suggestions) to give read-only access to the db for people to play with queries. If you have suggestions let me know...I don't know vBulletin's tables well enough to put together the requisite queries.... :/

[marcowanger]

I merged a few more things from the gdoc and the wiki into the draft #3. There are some good things in the long version that I think would fit quite well into the letter draft.

Any news yet on the tag cloud data?

Thanks. Let's merge them and see how it goes.

What would be nice to have:
1) a keyword analysis on posts to determine what the hot topics were in 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011
2) average number of users contributing to a discussion
3) site stats (e.g. site views per day)

Just to bump it it. We still need 3): To be provided by ECO.

1) & 2): need to ask people with mysql access

[marcowanger]

As I had mentioned earlier, I am happy to assemble that figure if someone gives me access to the post data.

genericforms. For this issue, you ask ECO or dan

I think we need to query the mysql db ...not familiar with vbulletin system personally

[adaptivegenome]

As I had mentioned earlier, I am happy to assemble that figure if someone gives me access to the post data.

[robs]

I merged a few more things from the gdoc and the wiki into the draft #3. There are some good things in the long version that I think would fit quite well into the letter draft.

Any news yet on the tag cloud data?

[marcowanger]

I like it too. It is coming along nicely!

cool. Keep up the pace.

[adaptivegenome]

I like it too. It is coming along nicely!

[marcowanger]

I think, we should decide on one place to work on the letter. Otherwise, it will be too confusing and you end up merging things together. I like the comment feature in the Google docs and think that the version there is in much better shape than the Draft #3 in the wiki.

Yes, robs, we should stick to one place.
But some prefer gdoc (myself) and some the wiki. It is always hard to choose among various platform to write together....

Anyway, as the latest ver is being pasted as #3, I think we should respect the change (it's not done by me). Yes, we then have to do additional work to merge things together. I feel ok with it.. I can help merging things back.

I do like the structure of the #3 though, it's more than description or promotion of SEQanswers. Rather it let readers to think about the change of forms of scientific communicaiton, something at least complement to journals.

I suggest to stick to the wiki editing.

[robs]

Hi Robs, seems the latest ver is #3 located at the wiki page

http://seqanswers.com/wiki/Publicati...for_SEQanswers

I started moving content from Gdoc back to the wiki

I think, we should decide on one place to work on the letter. Otherwise, it will be too confusing and you end up merging things together. I like the comment feature in the Google docs and think that the version there is in much better shape than the Draft #3 in the wiki.

[marcowanger]

I just checked and there was no update on the letter since my last changes yesterday. Will you be able to put those numbers in the letter sometime today? Do you need help with anything?

Hi Robs, seems the latest ver is #3 located at the wiki page

http://seqanswers.com/wiki/Publicati...for_SEQanswers

I started moving content from Gdoc back to the wiki

[robs]

I can get these numbers tonight, and Marco has an answer to future directions as part of the NAR paper i believe.

I just checked and there was no update on the letter since my last changes yesterday. Will you be able to put those numbers in the letter sometime today? Do you need help with anything?

[marcowanger]

Since I troubled you guys with the suggestion, I would be happy to be responsible for figuring out hot topics for 2007 to now...

thanks you genericforms

[adaptivegenome]

I can get these numbers tonight, and Marco has an answer to future directions as part of the NAR paper i believe.



This is harder, as I'm not a MySQL expert. If someone wants to hop on google chat or skype and help me with queries, it shouldn't be too bad to make a tag cloud or similar for #1. #2 i'd have to think about how to query to get, and #3 is easy from Google Analytics.

Since I troubled you guys with the suggestion, I would be happy to be responsible for figuring out hot topics for 2007 to now...

[adaptivegenome]

Yes, they say if they don't publish within 2 weeks, then you can consider your letter dead.

Well, it is always fine to file pre-submission inquiry first. At this moment, I think we can concentrate on the short letter to Sci/Nature first.

After we submit it and (touch wood) no good news come in 2 weeks, then we can email multiple journals that includes Genome Bio, Genome Med, PloS Comp Bio, etc.

Bioinformatics seems to lack editorial section.

Any other suggestions?

Honestly, I am really thinking if Science/Nature does not work out, we should go for Genome Medicine or Genome Biology as a Commentary with one figure. I personally would be excited to see this in Genome Medicine but both are great journals.