11 ms·

> I half expect to get banned from this forum for taking this minority view, in fact. This kind of sentence reveals much about your psychology, and not in your

> I half expect to get banned from this forum for taking this minority view, in fact. This kind of sentence reveals much about your psychology, and not in your favor, you should avoid it. I think your comment is a little confusing, and I am not sure if you re trying to argue in favor of crowd-sourced reviews/ratings, apart from arguing against the effectiveness of peer review and against "government influence." Anyway, if this is the case (that you believe that the opinion of peer scientists is of lesser value than that of the general public), I would like to point out that you are not examining properly any alternative to peer reviews, in particular crowd-sourcing. You also take your experience emotionally, and some arguments seem weak evidence for the dysfunction of the system as a whole: > ... Sometimes we'd have to submit the paper to another journal. > I don't like that some Professor Emeritus is holding to an older view, as that forces us to make our argument a bit stronger...

econgeeker 15y ago
My point is that journals should use whatever methodology to choose papers for publication that they feel is appropriate. And that there should be no forced "peer review" standard, since this methodology is currently being used to exclude valid scientific research for political purposes. This forum bans people for having a minority opinion. I wanted to mention that, because I would not be surprised to be banned for expressing such an opinion. When it happens, you have no way of knowing it. So, you probably think this forum is an open one where any opinion is allowed so long as you are not trolling. That is not the case.
- agravier 15y ago
  Indeed, I am thinking so, but I am ready to doubt my beliefs. Do you have anything substantial to back this? Surely, there must be external pages presenting the problems to which you refer, on websites are out of reach of anyone in control of such a censoring system.

econgeeker 15y ago

My point is that journals should use whatever methodology to choose papers for publication that they feel is appropriate. And that there should be no forced "peer review" standard, since this methodology is currently being used to exclude valid scientific research for political purposes. This forum bans people for having a minority opinion. I wanted to mention that, because I would not be surprised to be banned for expressing such an opinion. When it happens, you have no way of knowing it. So, you probably think this forum is an open one where any opinion is allowed so long as you are not trolling. That is not the case.

agravier 15y ago
Indeed, I am thinking so, but I am ready to doubt my beliefs. Do you have anything substantial to back this? Surely, there must be external pages presenting the problems to which you refer, on websites are out of reach of anyone in control of such a censoring system.