4 ms·
Until they get rid of that annoying endorsement system, I submit to SSRN. The endorsement system is a major hurdle for unaffiliated publishers and it still does
by elberto34 12y ago
Until they get rid of that annoying endorsement system, I submit to SSRN. The endorsement system is a major hurdle for unaffiliated publishers and it still doesn't keep nonsense and wrong stuff from occasionally appearing on the site. The traditional peer review process is very time consuming and difficult, and I think it's time to replace it with an open review or some more democratic form of review. The future of academic publishing could be journals being replaced by Wikis that allow researchers to continuously update stuff in real time, making the results available to public free of charge like this example of page that been updated since 2012 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Stockequation/sandbox http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Stockequation/sandbox
If somethings sounds promising and or passes the smell test, researchers may try to verify the results independently , with or without peer review
- lutorm 12y agoI think "journals being replaced by Wikis that allow researchers to continuously update stuff in real time" would be a terrible idea. If I'm going to use someone's results as basis for my own research, I really want to know that this is a final, "as good as they reasonably can make it" result, not an "oh we're not quite done with the hard, ungratifying work of actually crossing the ts and dotting the is but here it is" kind of result.
- sjtrny 12y agoVersioning solves this problem. It's effectively the same as people publishing follow up work. Most of the time the initial publication on things isnt comprehensive. For example in computer science people publish their idea to conferences because it is fast then submit a longer form to a journal where they have more room to include things like proofs.