So, I’ve had a bit of a think…
A nap can work wonders! From today's, I've played with ideas about how the current defunct peer review system can be disbanded and replaced with structural processes that align with the purpose of science - to let scholars talk about what they did, what they found, and what they think it means. Ego, prestige, and money are silencing voices that could really matter to someone else.
Peer review or enemy review?
Reviewers are us. Our peers. Doing exactly the same work. What happened to ‘treat people the way you wish to be treated’?