I'd also suggest that you not be afraid to exclude reviewers you know have a major bias or conflict of interest. Wise when used sparingly.
-
-
Replying to @JimJohnsonSci @DaniRabaiotti and
I also definitely trust my supervisor and collaborators in this, but it's all a bit nerve wracking tbh
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @Julie_B92 @JimJohnsonSci and
Always will be I'm afraid... And you'll never convince everyone, especially if some have built careers on it.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @JohnMulley @JimJohnsonSci and
I know bias will always be there, but I just don't see why a new system can't be built to intentionally reduce bias
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Julie_B92 @JimJohnsonSci and
It seems to be coming, but the journals doing it don't have the prestige (IF?) that career progression structures are built on.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JohnMulley @JimJohnsonSci and
It's not really journals I'm talking about, but a lot of OS advocates I've interacted with get defensive instead of listening re bias
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @Julie_B92 @JohnMulley and
That's basically the basis of what I've been tweeting all afternoon. OS CAN be so much better than the current system, but we have to TRY
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
-
Replying to @JohnMulley @JimJohnsonSci and
It is, and I don't have the answers. But until today nobody had offered to listen to concerns tbh
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @Julie_B92 @JohnMulley and
Thanks for sharing your perspective
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes
Thanks to everybody for taking part. Nice canoe. Hopefully my notifications will be a bit easier to manage now. 
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.