My manuscript for Expressive Processing has to go to the press pretty soon, but I’m hoping you’ll have a chance to share your thoughts on my “Computer Game Fictions” chapter before then. And then I’ll finally get back to meaningful blogging on other topics :-)

I have the students in my Writing for the Web course looking at the project now, so maybe it will inspire some of them to follow your precedent with their own research.

Good luck!

As I say in this page’s post, when my editor at MIT Press asked who I thought would be good to have peer review my manuscript, I realized I wanted the blog community discussing digital media, and especially the group around Grand Text Auto. I also wanted them to have the addressability provided by CommentPress, and that’s one of the close connections with Gamer Theory.

A couple differences from the Gamer Theory project have come up in many of my conversations. One is that this is being done in collaboration with an academic press. Among other things, this means the project is taking place in parallel with a traditional, blind, small-group academic peer review. I think it will be quite interesting to compare the two forms of response. Second, this project is being done in collaboration with existing online communities, which predate the project and will continue afterward. In particular, it is taking place at this blog, and taking a blog-like form (new material posted regularly, comments and trackbacks, etc). Given how much I’ve already gained from being part of blogging communities, I very much wanted to do the review this way.

In a later revamp of the site layout, the author’s name was placed at the top.

In this current revamped layout, the author of this blog post is listed neither at the top NOR at the bottom (in Firefox, at least). I can’t tell at all from the blog whose book is forthcoming, except by clicking through to the Chronicle of HE article and reading it there. (Well, ok, it was also visible in the trackbacks.)