MeowZedong
@MeowZedong@lemmygrad.ml
- Comment on Powerful 1 week ago:
Yeah, I feel like a good middle ground is to cite your previous work in the context of “as we previously reported,” but maybe that’s just based on something that was ingrained in me by academia. It seems tacky. My boss has no problem with it though, he’s like, “idgaf, more citations, more views, higher impact.”
- Comment on Elsevier 1 week ago:
I was kind of thinking of that with the institutional journal bit. It doesn’t need to be a traditional journal, the only things important to me are:
-
peer review (skip #2)
-
open access
-
professional editors to help improve phrasing, spelling, flow, etc.
-
DOI link or similar unique identifier
I’m totally down to ditch the traditional journal format otherwise. It was just a quick comment not meant to go in-depth, but point out that we already have public institutions that can host publications.
-
- Comment on Objectivity 1 week ago:
I swear it’s an official rule that reviewer 2 is required to be a huge pain in the ass.
- Comment on Elsevier 1 week ago:
Institutions could easily form their own journals. National organizations that provide grants could also require you to publish in their journal. Universities can run their own journals. These sorts of entities already exist and provide article access for free, publishing in them would just need to be normalized.
These are just a few options without researchers organizing anything for themselves.
- Comment on Motivation 1 month ago:
So you get spammed with emails asking for papers and presentations at conferences too?
- Comment on sweet dreams 1 month ago:
More believable than the meme.
- Comment on literally my supervisor 2 months ago:
Reviewer 1: looks, good, great paper!
Reviewer 2: Not enough statistical significance. Use more mice. MORE SKULLS FOR THE SKULL THRONE!