What a strange perspective. Citing a bad false paper in Cell is okay but citing a solid true preprint is not?https://twitter.com/mdshawkey/status/863348386879164416 …
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable
-
Exactly! Most pubs you have to trust 2-4 anon people who prob never saw the data. If
#preprints (w/ data) have errors, you'll def find out.1 reply 2 retweets 9 likes -
So you're only against anonymous and closed peer review. I see.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I'm mixed on peer review (& am having a hard think about my role in the pub process) I think anon peer review is necessary in some contexts.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @LisaDeBruine @o_guest and
My point was that you can't necessarily trust that peer review is even done by "experts", much less that they had sufficient data to review.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes
That makes me feel better about the review I've been asked to write. 
7:22 AM - 14 May 2017
0 replies
0 retweets
0 likes
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.