Home / Governance / Information for editors
Our independent Academic Advisory and Editorial Board and panel of subject specialists are seated and named. We are still appointing editors for the journals hosted on our platform, and continuing to add board members outside computing and engineering. This page sets out what each role involves, what we ask of you, and what we commit to in return - before you are asked to say yes to anything.
Four distinct roles
Each role has its own remit, its own workload and its own limits of authority. Where a role has no authority over something, we say so here rather than let you discover it later.
Senior scholars who read our policies before they are issued and advise on the ethics cases our editorial office refers up. The board is advisory and independent. It does not manage the company, and it does not decide the fate of any individual paper.
Commitment: a small number of policy reviews a year, plus referred cases as they arise. Correspondence-based; no fixed meeting schedule is imposed on you.
Faculty and industry experts who review applications from conferences and journals that want to publish on the platform - the scope, the editorial team, the review process proposed - and recommend approval, conditions, or refusal.
Commitment: occasional, and only in your own field. This is the role that keeps weak venues off the platform, so it is the one we screen hardest for.
Sets a journal's scope, appoints its editorial board, assigns handling editors, and owns the final decision on every paper in that journal. The Editor-in-Chief is named publicly on the journal's own page.
Commitment: continuous while the journal is active. We do not appoint an Editor-in-Chief who cannot give the role real time.
Handling editors run a paper through its review rounds and recommend a decision. Reviewers assess the work itself. Both see their assignments, deadlines and the author's response to earlier rounds in one console.
Commitment: per assignment. You choose what you accept, and you see the deadline before you accept it.
The board is seated and named, and a panel of subject specialists sits alongside it — you can see who they are. Nobody appeared on that page until they had accepted in writing, and that is still the rule. For each member we publish a name, an affiliation and country, the role held, and any declared interests — the same four things, for everyone, with no exceptions for seniority. We are still appointing, particularly in fields outside computing and engineering, which is why this page is here.
What we ask of you
Nothing here is unusual for a scholarly board. We write it down because a role accepted on a vague understanding is the role that goes wrong.
What we provide
You should not have to invent a process. Ours is published, versioned, and the same for every venue on the platform.
The end-to-end rules: assignment, review rounds, the final decision, fee disclosure, proofing and licensing. You apply this, rather than a house preference that changes.
Available in the platformWhat running a venue well involves, from the call for papers to closing a proceedings volume.
Available in the platformAssignments, deadlines and the pipeline in one place. Revised files open beside the author's point-by-point response, so a re-review does not start from scratch.
Every role has its own consoleEvery assignment, recommendation and decision is recorded against the paper. If a question is raised in three years, the record answers it - not somebody's memory of an email.
Held on the platform"On questions of research ethics and academic quality, our editors and board advise freely. A decision on a specific paper is made on scholarly grounds through peer review, never because a fee was paid."
Editorial independence statementHow to put yourself forward
Send your name, affiliation, field, and the role that interests you, with a link to your profile or publication list.
Against the field we need and the standards on our governance page. We reply either way, including when the answer is no.
Remit, expected workload, term length and the declarations required - sent to you before you commit to anything.
Your name and affiliation go on the board page only after you have accepted in writing. Never before.
Board and specialist roles are unpaid, as is standard for scholarly advisory bodies - being paid by the company would compromise the independence the role exists to provide. Editor-in-Chief appointments to a hosted journal are agreed individually with that journal's owner, and any arrangement is disclosed on the journal page.
For a board member, a few policy reviews a year plus referred cases - realistically a handful of hours a quarter. For a subject specialist, occasional venue applications in your own field. For a handling editor or reviewer, it is per assignment and you decide what you take. If we are asking for more than we said, tell us and we will fix it.
At any time, without notice or explanation. We remove your name from the board page promptly, and we will not describe a former member as current.
Your name, affiliation, country and role appear on the board page and in the governance record. We will not put you in an advertisement, an email campaign or a testimonial without asking you first, each time.
Say so, on the record. The board is advisory, so the company can decline your advice - but the disagreement is minuted, and you remain free to resign over it and to say publicly why.
No. We need active researchers and experienced practitioners with a publication record in the field, and for specialist review we often want industry experience that a purely academic panel lacks.
Read the governance page first. If you would not be comfortable having your name attached to what it says, this is not the right board for you - and we would rather you decided that now.