Pinned post

This is the account of the Grassroots Review Journal system. We will tweet about & (integrating) tools.

Grassroots Review Journals assess the quality of scientific articles & finished manuscripts. Because we only review, we are not limited by copy rights & people do not have to submit their articles to us for it to work.

We aim to be a valuable entry into the literature & to destroy the power of the publishers.

We need coders, editors & messengers.

Today is the launch of Octopus. Designed to replace journals and papers as the place to establish priority, Octopus publishes hypotheses, methods, data, analyses and reviews.

@bonfire is a new federated network for individuals and communities to design, operate and control their own digital lives. It's support #ActivityPub 👍

You can help Bonfire by becoming a beta tester today:

In my opinion, the whole #Bonfire UI is adorable and promising :owi:

From Reddit.

Author-suggested (and editor-selected) did not reveal any significant difference in the median recommendation scores compared to purely editor-selected reviewers in the Journal of Comparative Physiology A.

Opportunities and risks of publishing academic talks online. If talks are published speakers may be less willing to show preliminary results, discussion could be less open, journals should clarify whether they see this as prior publication.


G'day! I'm Conal Tuohy. I'm a NZer who's lived in Australia for years, with my Aussie partner. We live in Brisbane.

I'm a freelancer, doing software development, specialised consultancy (Web APIs, XML, linked data, text encoding) & training for a bunch of clients, especially #GLAM organisations and digital humanities people in universities. Always on the lookout for new & interesting work!

During the pandemic I've become an unpaid publicist for a bunch of local water dragons.

I like how "peer-review" concept is popularized now.

There is an issue though: the peer-review in science has all the same problems as maintenance work has in the software development.

Scientists are not paid or promoted for peer-reviews. In academic circles usually you praise people who do original research, not those who dig into the research of others.

And no one will give you a Fields medal for understanding what other Fields nominee actually did.


"Replacing the prestige signal." Bjoern Brembs argues that journal prestige hardly guides scientists on what to read. We would invest the enormous sums wasted on a modern quality control system with multiple review systems.

From Reddit.

"Peer review analyze: A novel benchmark resource for computational analysis of peer reviews." An annotated dataset with 1199 open peer review texts (∼ 17k sentences) for peer review research.

From Reddit.

ASAPbio trials crowd preprint review trial using Hypothesis web annotations. Only 29% agreed to participate, but authors that did and reviewers were (very) positive. A synthesis of the web annotations was missed.

From Reddit.

Leading scholars and publishers have agreed on a definition of predatory publishing. It does not include the quality of the peer review because it is impossible to assess. Would auditors/accountants lifting the review curtain be a solution?

Sci-Hub: is it Unethical to "Pirate" Science? (Video and transcript by scientific skeptic Rebecca Watson.) "The oligarchy these publishers have formed is immoral and antithetical to the pursuit of humanity’s knowledge"

Academic publishing – market or collectivization?

Copyright lawyer and former top Pirate politician Julia Reda calls for collectivization of scientific publishing. Regensburg Neurogenetic Bjoern Brembs worries about becoming a moderate.

Show older

Fediscience is the social network for scientists.