Nothing wrong with the impact factor as long as it isn't a hindrance to free and timely flow of scientific research results, I should think.
some that I see are so terrible though like not even proof read 
-
-
Have you looked at many formally published journal articles recently? :-)
-
I read a lot, yes

-
why do ppl keep thinking I don't read... Somebody (not saying but boss) asked me if know the journal
@cogsci_soc
-
I read articles in journals, yes. Preprints are almost always predictably unreadable and wrong in certain areas.
-
You must be very unlucky with preprints. In my experience there's little difference with formally published stuff.
-
maybe in your area? In mine: no.
-
I don't believe in luck. I sample and I deduce.

-
many in my area feel the same 2 so there's that as well. Preprints are amazing. I did 1 recently. But not enough.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
What is the real value of proofreading to the actual scientific communication? Is it not mainly just cosmetic?
-
no it's like the paper is unreadable and the text doesn't reflect what's in the repo in github, for example.
-
Which preprint server/service are you referring to?
-
arxiv and biorxiv for my area(s)
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.