I think there should be a discipline wide discussion about the role of discussants. I think the tradition of listening to the discussant (who is often someone who has the time, not necessarily the expertise to do the role) provide suggestions and critiques is a waste of time for the audience. and far too often is an exercise in public shaming. APSA is horrible in that respect. What about changing the role to a "reviewer" - one person who is willing to read the paper and provide written feedback to each panelist who wants it. And then just open it up right away to audience questions.
I do my best to not validate this kind of bullying with a full response. I keep mine curt and cordial, but sending a clear message I won’t engage.
I think there should be a discipline wide discussion about the role of discussants. I think the tradition of listening to the discussant (who is often someone who has the time, not necessarily the expertise to do the role) provide suggestions and critiques is a waste of time for the audience. and far too often is an exercise in public shaming. APSA is horrible in that respect. What about changing the role to a "reviewer" - one person who is willing to read the paper and provide written feedback to each panelist who wants it. And then just open it up right away to audience questions.
My first time here and I love it already. Would love to collaborate via my newsletter: Gradinterface, I could be reached via Gradinterface@gmail.com