But there were tricks that I learned about getting books from publishers. 2/x
I've gotten a few questions about this, so let me clarify and provide as much helpful information as this medium will allow.
To begin, both of my parents are MBA's and are assertive. They taught us four kids to be assertive. 1/x
Many underestimate the generosity of (most) publishers. I probably got $10,000 worth of free books during my 4 years in Durham by request exam or review copies. Sometimes, I just emailed a publisher and said, "I need this book, but I can't afford it. Can you help me out?"
— Stephen D. Campbell, Dr. theol. (@the_OT_Campbell) December 13, 2020
But there were tricks that I learned about getting books from publishers. 2/x
Some (like JHS) have no word limits, b/c they're online.
Some (like Vetus Testamentum) will happily publish 100 word reviews and 2,500 word review essays. 8/x
Fortress: Don't bother unless you get a review editor to get the book for you.
Routledge: I'm still waiting on them to reply to an email from 4 years ago. So I don't try. 11/x
Yale: They've made me jump through some crazy hoops to get books. I've had luck getting exam copies. 12/x
IVP: Not sure. They don't publish in Germany, so I've been able to get some ebooks, but nothing in print. 13/x
Westminster/John Knox: Not generous. You can sometimes convince them to give you a temporary digital copy.
OUP/CUP: You better know where the review will be published. If you do, then you have a good chance. 14/x
Eerdmans: They are generous, but their generosity has limits of how many exam copies you can get in a year. 15/x
Lexham: Very generous.
SBL: haven't tried.
Eisenbrauns: They are a very small press and not super generous. You have to be submitting to a high level journal. 16/x
Peter Lang: I don't bother asking anymore. They've always said no, unless it was the journal asking for me. 17/x
Mohr Siebeck: Also VERY generous. I've never been denied a request.
V&R: Less generous, but I've had recent luck since my PhD was completed. I told them exactly where the review will go. 18/x
Notre Dame UP: I stopped trying. I had luck once. But as I recall, they work very slowly.
Baylor Press: They are another small press that has to be careful with how many books they give away. Best to go through your review editor. 19/x
JPS: Never had luck with them either, unless the journal already had received the book from the publisher and the journal sent it to me.
Peeters: No luck there either. I suspect I'd have to go through the review editor. 20/x
More from Book
People have wondered why I have spent 3 days mostly pushing back on this idea that "defund the police" is bad marketing.
The reason is, it's an example of this magic trick, the oldest trick in the book.
It's a competition between what I call compass statements. And it matters.
There are a lot of people who think "defund the police" is a bad slogan.
But it's a directional intention. A compass statement.
The real effect of calling it a bad slogan, whether or not intentional (but usually intentional), is to reduce a compass statement down to a slogan.
Whenever there is a real problem and a clear solution, there will be people who benefit from the problem and therefore oppose the solution in a variety of ways.
And this is true of any real problem, not just the problem of lawless militarized white supremacist police.
There are people who oppose it directly using a wide variety of tactics, one of which is misconstruing anything—quite literally anything—said by those who propose solutions—any solutions.
They'd appreciate it if you mistake their deliberate misrepresentation for confusion.
The reason they'd appreciate if if you mistake their deliberate misrepresentation for confusion is, it wastes time that could have been spend on the solution trying to persuade them, with different arguments and metaphors or solutions.
Which they intend to misconstrue.
The reason is, it's an example of this magic trick, the oldest trick in the book.
It's a competition between what I call compass statements. And it matters.
There\u2019s a magic trick that\u2019s going to get played on us every day during the 2020 election cycle. It\u2019s a fairly simple trick, once you see it.
— A.R. Moxon (@JuliusGoat) February 17, 2019
I\u2019d like to talk about leadership and governance.
And the compass, the navigation, the travel, and the corrections.
(thread)
There are a lot of people who think "defund the police" is a bad slogan.
But it's a directional intention. A compass statement.
The real effect of calling it a bad slogan, whether or not intentional (but usually intentional), is to reduce a compass statement down to a slogan.
Whenever there is a real problem and a clear solution, there will be people who benefit from the problem and therefore oppose the solution in a variety of ways.
And this is true of any real problem, not just the problem of lawless militarized white supremacist police.
There are people who oppose it directly using a wide variety of tactics, one of which is misconstruing anything—quite literally anything—said by those who propose solutions—any solutions.
They'd appreciate it if you mistake their deliberate misrepresentation for confusion.
The reason they'd appreciate if if you mistake their deliberate misrepresentation for confusion is, it wastes time that could have been spend on the solution trying to persuade them, with different arguments and metaphors or solutions.
Which they intend to misconstrue.
You May Also Like
@franciscodeasis https://t.co/OuQaBRFPu7
Unfortunately the "This work includes the identification of viral sequences in bat samples, and has resulted in the isolation of three bat SARS-related coronaviruses that are now used as reagents to test therapeutics and vaccines." were BEFORE the
chimeric infectious clone grants were there.https://t.co/DAArwFkz6v is in 2017, Rs4231.
https://t.co/UgXygDjYbW is in 2016, RsSHC014 and RsWIV16.
https://t.co/krO69CsJ94 is in 2013, RsWIV1. notice that this is before the beginning of the project
starting in 2016. Also remember that they told about only 3 isolates/live viruses. RsSHC014 is a live infectious clone that is just as alive as those other "Isolates".
P.D. somehow is able to use funds that he have yet recieved yet, and send results and sequences from late 2019 back in time into 2015,2013 and 2016!
https://t.co/4wC7k1Lh54 Ref 3: Why ALL your pangolin samples were PCR negative? to avoid deep sequencing and accidentally reveal Paguma Larvata and Oryctolagus Cuniculus?
Unfortunately the "This work includes the identification of viral sequences in bat samples, and has resulted in the isolation of three bat SARS-related coronaviruses that are now used as reagents to test therapeutics and vaccines." were BEFORE the
chimeric infectious clone grants were there.https://t.co/DAArwFkz6v is in 2017, Rs4231.
https://t.co/UgXygDjYbW is in 2016, RsSHC014 and RsWIV16.
https://t.co/krO69CsJ94 is in 2013, RsWIV1. notice that this is before the beginning of the project
starting in 2016. Also remember that they told about only 3 isolates/live viruses. RsSHC014 is a live infectious clone that is just as alive as those other "Isolates".
P.D. somehow is able to use funds that he have yet recieved yet, and send results and sequences from late 2019 back in time into 2015,2013 and 2016!
https://t.co/4wC7k1Lh54 Ref 3: Why ALL your pangolin samples were PCR negative? to avoid deep sequencing and accidentally reveal Paguma Larvata and Oryctolagus Cuniculus?
