Just to be clear, you are assessing the quality of the text based on the 1 page editor’s introduction and what you believe the authors will write, and without having actually read it?
I’m assessing the text that’s currently available, yes. I think my original comment was perfectly clear on that. I hope the book itself is better than the editors’ introduction would indicate, but it’s not unreasonable to assess what they’ve shared so far.
The comment I replied to sounds like you’re critiquing the main academic work rather than a description of it, so I wanted to check if you had read an advance copy or something.
Just to be clear, you are assessing the quality of the text based on the 1 page editor’s introduction and what you believe the authors will write, and without having actually read it?
I’m assessing the text that’s currently available, yes. I think my original comment was perfectly clear on that. I hope the book itself is better than the editors’ introduction would indicate, but it’s not unreasonable to assess what they’ve shared so far.
The comment I replied to sounds like you’re critiquing the main academic work rather than a description of it, so I wanted to check if you had read an advance copy or something.