I think there’s a lot of really good responses, that I won’t repeat.I think the traditional model of journals has a lot of issues, not the least of which are bad incentives.The new model used by eLife is pretty exciting to me, but very different than what you proposed. I think it’s worth considering:
only reviewing works that have already been published as preprints (I think LW/AF should count for this, as well as ArXiV)
publishing reviews—this lets the rest of the community benefit more from the labor of reviewing, though it does raise the standard for reviewers
curate the best / highest reviewed articles to be “published”
The full details of their new system is here in an essay they published describing the changes and why they made them.
I think there’s a lot of really good responses, that I won’t repeat.
I think the traditional model of journals has a lot of issues, not the least of which are bad incentives.
The new model used by eLife is pretty exciting to me, but very different than what you proposed. I think it’s worth considering:
only reviewing works that have already been published as preprints (I think LW/AF should count for this, as well as ArXiV)
publishing reviews—this lets the rest of the community benefit more from the labor of reviewing, though it does raise the standard for reviewers
curate the best / highest reviewed articles to be “published”
The full details of their new system is here in an essay they published describing the changes and why they made them.