Thanks for your encouragement, Keith and Justin. Actually, I have hoped to stir up a larger debate on timely ways of publishing anthropology within the framework of the AOC, but so far, this larger debate hasn't manifested. Maybe I should have chosen another title for my post - something like "better publishing for a better world", I mean something which catches people's attention. OAC Bulletin probably sounds too boring. I can understand that. Besides, "Bulletin" isn't the right word - I agree with you Keith. "OAC Bulletin" just looked nice to me and helped me to differentiate the outlined project from a journal. Actually, what I have in mind is something like the German "Depesche", which comes as "dispatch" in English, but this sounds odd.
Justin: Sorry for being ignorant about John's seminar series. Didn't take notice of it so far. I agree it would be a good idea to link the publishing more closely to this series.
Still, I would love to hear other voices!!
Thanks a lot for your helpful comments. They made me change my mind. • When it comes to the editorial board, I personally would favour elections. Not only that this is the most transparent way. What is more, it will bring a lot of publicity to the OAC Press, at least within the OAC community. And this is what it lacks so far.
Again, of course: Any comment welcome!
I agree that Florian's proposal is strong and clearly workable. Personally I would like an OAC journal to (have the potential to) be multilingual, or at least to encourage contributions in the main languages people use in the OAC including Portuguese, Spanish and Russian, for instance. If the editorial board is to be elected, then the candidates need to reflect this diversitarian possibility.