Quick clarification: this "shaming" is not from bioRXiv, but from somebody who's decided they don't like this practice. As far as I can see this is simply posting final author copy of accepted manuscripts, otherwise called "green open access". This is encouraged by @PsyArXiv.
-
-
"So taken together, there could be a considerable number of people using bioRxiv as a postprint server…and getting away with it." This guy really loves his drama
-
Seems odd that bioRxiv has a policy that they're ignoring and/or not enforcing, tho. (I don't have a strong opinion about the "open science violation" aspect either way.)
-
Agreed. I'm not convinced this shaming idea is what needs to be done though. Seems more like we should open a dialogue and see what's up. They may indeed be corrupt but not sure what the point of shaming violators and not the enforcers...
-
It's not crime...

-
If it was crime — fine, sure, shame everybody. But this is not really anything morally corrupt other than the biorxiv being a bit fast and lose with their own rules, which seems bad but there's not real abuse here AFAIK!
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.