Stephanie: Replacing the overly forced competitive gold star mongering that Publishing companies illicit with a system that can advance career stability while capturing more of the potential that is currently slipping through the system.
Department shitiness
Strategy games political not publish since 2017 in respectable journals.
Not a real PI long term post doc, could do things, technologist, have
Political white dudes try to maintain power, only hire people they train
Publishing holds scientists career's hostage--> people only want ... no rotation. Keep people.
Prevents from collegial terrified about being scooped. ONly submit finished stories rather than proto things.
Overproducing PhD's... Not a lot of long term job prospects. 90% don't have a job at the end of the tunnel. How does the labor force get supported. Limited number of spots.
CNS journals get to determine careers because there are a limited number of spots.
Lots of ideas don't get the representation it represents.
Can be decided by 3 academics that are known in the field.
Sometimes PI's give the review process to Post doc's/phd's.
Peer review is all free
New ideas might belong to young scientists and old might not get it.
Ideal:
Reasonable:
"Reviewer 2 asshole"
$1000s to submit, someone assigned to your submission, find reviewers that are relevant, be smart about the publishers intent for choosing, create a review committee (top heavy), then reviewers not paid, might be in direct competition with them, 3-4 weeks get it back with comments and feedback (minor major revision/reject),
Even when ask for revision don't publish.*** where lots of people get fucked.
Editors get the final say (1 person).
e-life: biology open source, publish reviewers comments with paper, less insane.
Double blind revision
Cut out big names as opposed to review on merit of ideas.
Development:
Not ask people to do revisions unless minor. If paper is accepted for revision 90% get through.
Faster turn-around
Plos: 3-4 month revision process then reject....
Publishing record gets people jobs.
Competition: healthy, but not all or nothing. Link studies that are working with similar concepts and be searchable.
Basic rules of research:
Be a super genius
Keep funding up to speed.
Need to play a lot of weird games to manipulate and counter manipulate schemes.
Prove to the world you deserve the job where publishing dictates
Publish big, quickly, and get a job quickly.
Idea sharing becomes restricted because you need one to start a
Funding makes progress hard
Career stability:
Cool if institutes hire for expertiese instead of having ind groups harvest ind idea, papers are so dense info dissemination hard,
We did this and we saw this weird thing....
Journal of negative results.
Doesn't benefit careers but benefits science.
More dialogue
Feedback on the go.
Can become a group international to validate so both negative and positive data have a place.
might be forming but not public.
The findings precident over people and have peopel supported.
Profile: what conversations can you add to?