5 ms·

OP here. I'm a molecular biologist at Harvard and have published several times in Nature, Science, and Cell, premier journals in our field. Ask me anything.

anigbrowl 12y ago
I wish I had cottoned on to how interesting molecular biology is when I was in grade school. But as regards this outlet, I have two questions: 1. Is the tumblr-like format not a barrier to compared to the more typical presentation of Abstract, full paper and so on? I found the UI pretty unwieldy, but OTOH that's just a teething problem. 2. As a well-established resercher, you still mention the journals as the 'gold standard' of quality. Obviously up-and-coming researchers desperately want the recognition of being published in a prestigious forum like that in order to advance their careers. What do you think would be the 'tipping point' for publication in a new format journal like Onarbor to be sufficiently prestigious for citing on a resume, attracting funding and so forth? It's a nice site, but I can't help a feeling of 'academics reinvent tumblr, hail it as the future of publishing.'
- untilHellbanned 12y ago
  Great questions. 1. tumblr-like format: feeds are the most common UI and are standard for billions of people on the internet. Traditional academic publishing format are known to significantly less than 1 million people. Onarbor would rather satisfy the former. 2. "What do you think would be the 'tipping point' for publication in a new format". Onarbor devised the tipping point to be similar to what Stackoverflow (SO) is doing with Reputation for computer programmers (REF below). The reputation you earn on SO is replacing the C.V. in hiring decisions across silicon valley. Onarbor more or less replicates SO's Reputation system with the analogous intent to replace existing academia advancement mechanisms. "It's a nice site, but I can't help a feeling of 'academics reinvent tumblr, hail it as the future of publishing.'" Onarbor is publishing and funding in one site. So the real goal is to do away with Nature and the NIH at the same time. Try funding a work. Your experience will quickly diverge from that you've had on Tumblr. ref: http://stackoverflow.com/help/whats-reputation http://stackoverflow.com/help/whats-reputation
  - anigbrowl 12y ago
    It's a great concept that deserves to succeed, and building the funding aspect in at the infrastructure level might make a big difference. I also like the deeper ambition o redefining the university - as an outsider to that system I just feel a bit skeptical by default. I'll dig into it further and see what happens!
nelsonliu 12y ago
Hi untilHellbanned, Why post these publicly, vs having them be in private journals?
- untilHellbanned 12y ago
  Being public helps the world. Being private helps nobody.
dfc 12y ago
Why not publish with PLoS Biology?
- untilHellbanned 12y ago
  see my response to user lvs
ninguem2 12y ago
Why don't you guys (biologists) use the ArXiv like everybody else? http://arxiv.org/ http://arxiv.org/
- untilHellbanned 12y ago
  see my response to user lvs

anigbrowl 12y ago

I wish I had cottoned on to how interesting molecular biology is when I was in grade school. But as regards this outlet, I have two questions: 1. Is the tumblr-like format not a barrier to compared to the more typical presentation of Abstract, full paper and so on? I found the UI pretty unwieldy, but OTOH that's just a teething problem. 2. As a well-established resercher, you still mention the journals as the 'gold standard' of quality. Obviously up-and-coming researchers desperately want the recognition of being published in a prestigious forum like that in order to advance their careers. What do you think would be the 'tipping point' for publication in a new format journal like Onarbor to be sufficiently prestigious for citing on a resume, attracting funding and so forth? It's a nice site, but I can't help a feeling of 'academics reinvent tumblr, hail it as the future of publishing.'

untilHellbanned 12y ago
Great questions. 1. tumblr-like format: feeds are the most common UI and are standard for billions of people on the internet. Traditional academic publishing format are known to significantly less than 1 million people. Onarbor would rather satisfy the former. 2. "What do you think would be the 'tipping point' for publication in a new format". Onarbor devised the tipping point to be similar to what Stackoverflow (SO) is doing with Reputation for computer programmers (REF below). The reputation you earn on SO is replacing the C.V. in hiring decisions across silicon valley. Onarbor more or less replicates SO's Reputation system with the analogous intent to replace existing academia advancement mechanisms. "It's a nice site, but I can't help a feeling of 'academics reinvent tumblr, hail it as the future of publishing.'" Onarbor is publishing and funding in one site. So the real goal is to do away with Nature and the NIH at the same time. Try funding a work. Your experience will quickly diverge from that you've had on Tumblr. ref: http://stackoverflow.com/help/whats-reputation http://stackoverflow.com/help/whats-reputation
- anigbrowl 12y ago
  It's a great concept that deserves to succeed, and building the funding aspect in at the infrastructure level might make a big difference. I also like the deeper ambition o redefining the university - as an outsider to that system I just feel a bit skeptical by default. I'll dig into it further and see what happens!

nelsonliu 12y ago

Hi untilHellbanned, Why post these publicly, vs having them be in private journals?

untilHellbanned 12y ago
Being public helps the world. Being private helps nobody.

dfc 12y ago

Why not publish with PLoS Biology?

untilHellbanned 12y ago
see my response to user lvs

ninguem2 12y ago

Why don't you guys (biologists) use the ArXiv like everybody else? http://arxiv.org/ http://arxiv.org/

untilHellbanned 12y ago
see my response to user lvs