-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Should we discuss the author's order? #86
Comments
Current order:
It feels more right that @supernord you are not lost in the middle. So either on the first or last position given the work you put in the preprint. Same for @matuskalas |
I think you @bebatut @paulzierep @supernord absolutely should both discuss and decide this 😊 My suggestion would be that you 3 take the first-author and last-author places, just decide who of you which, gladly with "shared first" or "shared last" authorship. I'm fine with being somewhere in the middle. Sure this isn't sooo crucial for a preprint, but it still might occassionally matter, and I'd also see it as an exercise for the next, "peer"-reviewed publication. |
I reckon you @bebatut @paulzierep @supernord also know best how to order the contributors from Freiburg and Australia. @supernord, was it really only Joseph & you contributing from AU?? I had a feeling you were a big group 😮 |
But yeah, if you don't have time to discuss or cannot/hesitate to decide, I can give you as apparently the |
I'm happy to be last author.
I don't think we have overlooked anyone. We were a big group, but we were also working across a few projects at once. |
What about then @paulzierep and me as first authors, @supernord as last, and everyone in the middle in alphabetical order? |
Sorry for being late here, I agree on that ! |
Should we discuss the author's order?
Originally posted by @bebatut in #79 (comment)
Moving this to a new issue so that I can merge the PR and create a new preview pdf for the paper.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: