vision was the recognition that
ACM needed to create a framework in which many research
publications could flourish to
reflect the burgeoning of
computer science (Transactions on
Mathematical Software and
Transactions on Database Systems had
already been launched), and that
more flexibility was needed if this
somewhat pedantic taxonomy for
the Transactions that, correctly,
has long since been abandoned.
After considerable debate,
head scratching, and socialization,
the Publications Board and
Council adopted this new “
Conceptual Framework.” There was
much opposition, of course, from
many researchers who (at least
“[W]ith this issue we are initiating several approaches
that represent new directions. This is so that we may
better serve the needs of the Association both in terms
of the requirements of our profession and in terms of the
diverse interests of our readers.”
—M. STUART LYNN,
CACM EIC, FEBRUARY 1971.
was to happen. In fact, CACM as
a purely research publication was
ironically inhibiting this growth,
sapping some of the best papers
that could instead be used as a critical mass to launch new research
publications. At the same time
there was a growing backlog in
CACM and the ensuing publication delays understandably upset
many authors. We proposed a
structure that we believed would
lead to the birth of many more
research Transactions and also
shorten publication lead times.
To complete this picture, conversely, CACM had to change
radically. Research articles would
be moved to JACM and to existing and new Transactions. In their
stead, CACM would publish articles of broader appeal that would
nevertheless be authoritative and
definitive. The revised CACM
was, as Peter Denning writes in
his essay, conceptually called
“JAM”—the Journal for All
Members. We also developed a
initially) felt they were being
shortchanged, losing the opportunity for their published papers to
reach an audience of tens of thousands, regardless of whether the
majority of those “readers” would
ever look at those papers. Others
felt that some of the best papers
would escape ACM’s publications
altogether and be published elsewhere—a legitimate concern at
the time, even though it did not
in fact happen. Yet others felt that
the proposed directions for
CACM did not reach far enough
into transforming it into a competitive commercial product.
Undoubtedly, there are still many
today who do not accept the
“CACM decision.”
We went forward. Peter Denning took the helm of the ‘new’
CACM and did a brilliant job of
transforming concept into reality.
CACM did not descend into the
throwaway rag that many feared.
The contents became much more
readable by the broader member-
ship, but the articles were still
important and definitive, providing deeper understanding of
trends and issues in the field. We
launched many new Transactions,
significantly increasing opportunities for the publication of
research material. Each new publication stood on its own feet
financially.
I am long retired and out of
touch with the field—and with
ACM. My association with
ACM’s publications and Council
ended in the early 1980s. I now
see computing from the perspective of an avid user who benefits
every day from concepts, ideas,
and developments that were first
nurtured in ACM’s publications.
I feel a sense of pride that I in my
own small way—along with so
many great colleagues and a terrific staff—was involved as a catalyst in making some of this
possible.
I recently browsed ACM’s
publications list. It is extraordinary! The changes, of course,
have been enormous even looking
beyond the transition to so much
material available online—a
direction not anticipated in the
LRCF. There are now over 30
Transactions, six journals, and
numerous other publications far
extending the early four publications of JACM (the very first),
CACM, Computing Reviews and
Computing Surveys all of which
still flourish. Most of this explosive growth occurred long after
my years of association with
ACM.
But it all began with the battle
of the covers! c
M. STUART LYNN ( mslynn@mac.com) is
retired and living in Palm Springs, CA.