Important Qs but don't agree. Maybe perspective of subject where preprints novel? Physics has been doing this successfully 4 years
-
-
Replying to @jmyearsley @o_guest
Perhaps could turn question on its head: If you can't discuss till after review, what's the point of preprints?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jmyearsley
I never said can't discuss. I am merely very surprised by the lack of a critical take.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @o_guest @jmyearsley
A tweet doesn't allow for too much nuance or for me to expand mu thoughts — the thread/subthreads that follow under the OP expand my take.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @o_guest
Fair enough. Danger of tweeting past each other always high! Still, sounds like u wanted 2 make specific point about being preprint
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jmyearsley @o_guest
Here's my tuppence worth: Whenever I read any MS I make a judgment about how much faith to put in results.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jmyearsley @o_guest
Many factors influence this, inc whether published. SciCom writers do the same. Credulity is a judgment call.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jmyearsley @o_guest
Equally lack of critical appraisal not specific to reports on preprints. So meh basically.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @o_guest
Not accusing u of this, but danger of saying preprints OK for 'qualified' readers like u&me, but shouldn't let joe public near them
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
Joe public doesn't vaccinate their children, votes brexit, thinks engineering is science, thinks scientists aren't trustworthy. 
-
-
Replying to @o_guest @jmyearsley
They also, on a more serious note, deserve better journalism on the whole.
0 replies 0 retweets 1 likeThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.