In the 1970s, Milton Mazer commented to me that one of the hallmarks of a recognized field of science is a journal dedicated to publishing its findings.
Beginning in 1992, Greg Williams dedicated his considerable energy and skills to publishing excerpts from our CSGnet email discussions as a journal called Closed Loop. We were too few, and not enough work was being done. The last issue was in 1994.
Now, however, we are seeing PCT articles published in diverse scattered places. These can be hard to find or even know about, and are usually behind a paywall. Sometimes the gatekeepers, the editors and referees for journals and compiled books, have required compromises.
On this Christmas morning I thought how we could bootstrap a journal by authors getting permission for us to reprint their work. An editorial preface to contextualize each piece could reframe any politic compromises. Combined with new submissions, this could ensure enough substance for each issue at the start.
A stronger alternative is for the author to prepare an updated paper for our PCT journal, a revision of their paper previously published elsewhere. That might even be easier than wrangling permission to reprint, and affords a better way to undo undue editorial constraints.
[Addendum 2025-01-30: In a non-PCT publication, pages must be devoted to introducing, explaining, and justifying PCT. The first step of revision for our Journal of Perceptual Control Theory should be to leave that out, and to fix misleading equivalences to conventional concepts and terminology, if any were introduced as an appeal to editors and reviewers. The second step then can be to expand on the actual substance of the piece. In new writing, the introductory apparatus is unnecessary. Conversely, our journal can be the place of first publication, potentially establishing priority for findings or conjectures alike, while a version can be submitted or even in review in one or more of the conventional disciplinary silos, with introductory apparatus and perhaps other editorial ‘adjustments’ tuned to the given audience.]
By covering the full gamut the journal would demonstrate the discipline-transgressing universality of control.
Judith Johnson, one of your colleagues at Manchester, Warren, has looked into how to start a journal and proposes a step by step breakdown: “How to start a journal and beat the academic publishing racket.”
Shane Gao presents a similar analysis on Quora here.
Instruction and resources are offered by The University of Kansas and by USC, among others.
John Bond of Riverwinds Consulting offers a series of instructive videos, starting here.
We would need to learn the process to get a new journal into libraries. It could be behind a paywall except to members, or it could be open access. There is a “subscribe to open” process in which libraries support a journal converting from a traditional subscription-only economic model to an open-access model.
There is an opportunity here for some of our newer members. The time is ripe.