@o_guest Other than its complete inability to describe an article's value, and then used to measure the value of a researcher?
-
-
Replying to @froggleston @o_guest
Indeed. If you don't value the IF, stick to preprints. If you can't afford that, the IF has value (albeit irrational).
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Villavelius
I assume
@froggleston wants to reduce its present real value via systemic change. But revolutionary action may alter this.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @froggleston
I'm all for systemic change, but too many parties have to agree. Preprints can be a systemic bypass. I hope.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Villavelius @froggleston
some that I see are so terrible though like not even proof read
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @froggleston
Have you looked at many formally published journal articles recently? :-)
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
why do ppl keep thinking I don't read... Somebody (not saying but boss) asked me if know the journal
@cogsci_soc
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I read articles in journals, yes. Preprints are almost always predictably unreadable and wrong in certain areas.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @Villavelius
I think this is where editorial obviously has value and is an important part of sci comms. Preeps are flag planting.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
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.
