Don't laugh....it could happen. Lets hope Topali and Loughran lead long healthy lives.
Just wait a few years til the editorial team is Pratt, Jay Tea, Cullen and Pyrooz.
New Editorial Team for Criminology
-
He’s a Nagin student. Trained in a policy program, so yes, very Econ oriented (like Shawn Bushway). His stuff is smart though and he gets theory. I’m not sure what you mean by ideological. He and Topalli will bring sone good balance methodologically speaking.
I know Loughran -- he is /s/m/a/rt but q/ui/te co/ns/ervative
and he is v dis/mis/sive of stu/d/ies /h/e di/sag/rees with id/eolog/i/c//a/l/l/y.
So an economist-wannabe?
I've discussed research with him, and he finds methodological reasons to dis papers that do not affirm his priors.
[1/2]That hasn't been my experience.
-
What do you mean?
He�s a Nagin student. Trained in a policy program, so yes, very Econ oriented (like Shawn Bushway). His stuff is smart though and he gets theory. I�m not sure what you mean by ideological. He and Topalli will bring sone good balance methodologically speaking.
I know Loughran -- he is /s/m/a/rt but q/ui/te co/ns/ervative
and he is v dis/mis/sive of stu/d/ies /h/e di/sag/rees with id/eolog/i/c//a/l/l/y.
So an economist-wannabe?
I've discussed research with him, and he finds methodological reasons to dis papers that do not affirm his priors.
[1/2]
That hasn't been my experience. -
What do you mean?
He?s a Nagin student. Trained in a policy program, so yes, very Econ oriented (like Shawn Bushway). His stuff is smart though and he gets theory. I?m not sure what you mean by ideological. He and Topalli will bring sone good balance methodologically speaking.
I know Loughran -- he is /s/m/a/rt but q/ui/te co/ns/ervative
and he is v dis/mis/sive of stu/d/ies /h/e di/sag/rees with id/eolog/i/c//a/l/l/y.
So an economist-wannabe?
I've discussed research with him, and he finds methodological reasons to dis papers that do not affirm his priors.
[1/2]
That hasn't been my experience.I've discussed research with TL and haven't noticed him finding methodological reasons to dis papers that contradict his priors (whatever those are assumed to be). He does often have methodological critiques that I wouldn't have thought to raise but I think that's just a function of his background and knowledge base rather than an attempt to nitpick papers based on some ideological stance. His communication style does come off blunt/rude at first so that might contribute to how others have received his comments but I think that's just how he talks to be honest.
-
Nah. That may be what a small group of them rich wielding villager types want but people have moved on and the new editors are probably going to be fine. The only whiner out there is JPickett and even he has finally shut up about (thank god).
I'd say Criminology is heading in the right direction and AJS is not.
Criminology is going to be stained until they take real ac/countability for the Stewart scandal. Handing over control of the journal to new editors isn't enough on its own. -
Torch wielding.
Nah. That may be what a small group of them rich wielding villager types want but people have moved on and the new editors are probably going to be fine. The only whiner out there is JPickett and even he has finally shut up about (thank god).
I'd say Criminology is heading in the right direction and AJS is not.
Criminology is going to be stained until they take real ac/countability for the Stewart scandal. Handing over control of the journal to new editors isn't enough on its own. -
He’s sort of an awkward guy sone times despite the fashionable way he dresses. He’s also smart and I’m sure that doesn’t help when dealing with sone of the shallow forehead “scholars” in criminology.
What do you mean?
He?s a Nagin student. Trained in a policy program, so yes, very Econ oriented (like Shawn Bushway). His stuff is smart though and he gets theory. I?m not sure what you mean by ideological. He and Topalli will bring sone good balance methodologically speaking.
I know Loughran -- he is /s/m/a/rt but q/ui/te co/ns/ervative
and he is v dis/mis/sive of stu/d/ies /h/e di/sag/rees with id/eolog/i/c//a/l/l/y.
So an economist-wannabe?
I've discussed research with him, and he finds methodological reasons to dis papers that do not affirm his priors.
[1/2]
That hasn't been my experience.
I've discussed research with TL and haven't noticed him finding methodological reasons to dis papers that contradict his priors (whatever those are assumed to be). He does often have methodological critiques that I wouldn't have thought to raise but I think that's just a function of his background and knowledge base rather than an attempt to nitpick papers based on some ideological stance. His communication style does come off blunt/rude at first so that might contribute to how others have received his comments but I think that's just how he talks to be honest.