Article proposes a critique of a policy or practice with specific action proposals or suggestions.
Article follows conventions of academic research article — e.g. position in literature, cited sources, and claimed contribution.
Article is based on developments that have not yet occurred.
Article is based on formal logic or mathematical technique.
Language quality: 1/2*
Standard of English expression in article is excellent.
Scope of debate: 1/2
Article addresses an issue which is widely known and debated.
Most related sources are mentioned in article [this is an invitation to careful selection rather than a demonstration of prowess in citation collection — i.e. apt and representative choices made in source citations.
Logical flow: 2/2*
Ideas are well organised in article.
The argument presented in article is new.
Review impact: 2/2
The article has been significantly changed as a result of the review process
Reviewers indicate their appreciation of the article in the form of a 50 word statement.
The paper is an interesting theoretical and practical contribution in articulating the broadening of design’s understanding of what a collective is and the meaning of politics. I also appreciate the concreteness and detail in this paper, which inquires into the production of a commons and its infrastructuring through the study of the redesign practices of a tent belonging to USEN, which brings together different ventures and collectives. The explored relationship between the commons and infrastructuring by creating common infrastructures, using the concept of composition and cosmogram, is now much clearer than it was in the previous paper. I would only suggest to not end the paper with bullets, but some closing statement after the bullets.
The article proposes an original case study, which is interesting in relation to the special issue’s subject matter. It is well researched and properly organised.