[ Deutsch | English | Español | Français | Italiano | Português ]
Contributions submitted to HyperNietzsche for publication (articles, reviews, translations, bibliographies, commentaries, transcriptions, paths) must be written in a language that is read by at least two members of the Editorial Board.
It is the responsibility of the President of HyperNietzsche to ensure that at least the following languages are sufficiently represented on the Editorial Board: English, French, German, Italian, Portuguese, and Spanish.
HyperNietzsche will only accept for publication contributions that meet high standards of scholarship. The evaluative criteria adopted by the Editorial Board correspond in principle to those used by international academic journals published in hard copy. However, in order to counteract the negative effects of the widespread notion that the Internet is the publishing venue of last resort, the Editorial Board will apply even more stringent criteria than is commonly the case.
Contributions are submitted and evaluated exclusively through the Internet. The HyperNietzsche system has been designed to insure that contributions can be sent and evaluated anonymously, so that the members of the Editorial Board do not know the identity of the author, and likewise, the author does not know which members of the Editorial Board have evaluated the contribution.
It is not necessary that every member of the Editorial Board read every submission, although it is certainly desirable that each member, taking into account his or her interests and other responsibilities, should read as many contributions as possible. When it comes time for the election of a new Editorial Board – that is, every two years – the President will publish the number and type of contributions evaluated by each member of the current Board.
Each member of the Editorial Board may offer only one evaluation of each contribution. A simple vote for or against is sufficient, but this can also be supplemented by an explanation or perhaps by suggestions for revision. The author of any such supplement will remain anonymous, but the opinion will be made available to the other members of the Editorial Board and, at the discretion of the author of the report, to the author of the contribution.
Positive or negative votes that are presented to the other members of the Editorial Board one week before the deadline for a publication decision on a given contribution should be particularly well-founded.
In order to be accepted for publication, a contribution must be evaluated positively by a majority of at least two members of the Editorial Board. This means that in the absence of a negative evaluation, two positive evaluations will be sufficient for publication. If a contribution receives any negative votes, it must receive a total of positive votes that exceeds the number of negative votes by at least two in order to qualify for publication.
Two months after submission, a contribution will be automatically accepted or declined based upon the number of votes for or against publication.
Declined contributions will only be reviewed a second time if they have been thoroughly and substantially revised.
Contributions that have not been evaluated by at least two members of the Editorial Board after two months have elapsed are de facto declined, but they may be re-submitted without revision.
A contribution may be accepted for publication before the customary two-month waiting period if it remains in a publishable state – that is to say, with at least two more positive votes than the number of negative votes, if any – for two weeks without interruption. If, during these two weeks, the necessary majority is lost as a result of new negative evaluations, acceptance will be postponed until the necessary majority of positive votes is regained and remains in place for two weeks.