I've just run through the reviewer registration process at http://www.peertopatent.org/ Here are some comments. I would have expected the front page URL to be general info, with reviewer registration at a URL like http://www.peertopatent.org/reviewer_reg The personal profile form seems slightly too US-centric, with a drop-down list for US states only. Although it is a USPTO pilot, reviewers from around the world should be welcomed. There should be a link explaining what a "facilitator" is; I don't recall seeing the concept of a facilitator in previous CPR documents. I think it is too simplistic to have a single "professional role". People may have different roles with different affiliations. I think the personal profile is asking for too much information, and the wrong kind. It looks like academic CV style information. In particular, the "publications, grants, awards, memberships" info is overboard. Open source developers won't be welcomed by the focus on things like grants and awards; they will want to be recognized for their open source projects and their roles within those projects. Isn't there a goal to encourage participation by open source developers? I'd suggest this: a simplified structure just asking people to list their most important "affiliations and roles". Encourage people to list open source projects in which they are active participants, as well as their business or school setting. Other types of affiliation that may be useful in identifying a reviewer's public profile include participation in standardization groups like IETF and OASIS, as well as memberships/participation in scientific, professional or public-interest society. -- Robert D. Cameron, Ph.D. Professor of Computing Science Simon Fraser University _______________________________________________ p2patent-developer mailing list p2patent-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.linux-foundation.org/mailman/listinfo/p2patent-developer
