@JJ_Emerson In one of the original (and often forgotten) efforts in this arena, Biology Direct basically argued that they'd review anything they could get board members to agree to review (or solicit reviews for) https://t.co/YNn7048Bu1
RT @SCEdmunds: @rgaiacs Well, if you ignore these (admittedly pioneering and ahead of their time) guys also coming up with this model in 20…
RT @SCEdmunds: In January 2006 Biology Direct introduced a new publishing model that eliminated accept/reject decisions. The Editors detai…
eLife's new publishing model is certainly an interesting one but they are not the first to try it.
RT @SCEdmunds: In January 2006 Biology Direct introduced a new publishing model that eliminated accept/reject decisions. The Editors detai…
In January 2006 Biology Direct introduced a new publishing model that eliminated accept/reject decisions. The Editors detailed their plan to relinquish the traditional journal role of gatekeeper https://t.co/zdpFvJGy1j (Springer then bought BMC + killed
@rgaiacs Well, if you ignore these (admittedly pioneering and ahead of their time) guys also coming up with this model in 2006 https://t.co/zdpFvJGy1j
@purvisiop @BioMedCentral Not me personally, but Eugene Koonin, Laura Landweber, and David Lipman did: https://t.co/00cfrdaMtJ. Editorials: https://t.co/JoKGglcx1x; https://t.co/XoLN5A6lJq https://t.co/iKRyYKmbUO
RT @JekelyLab: Biology Direct pioneered open peer review and has been publishing both reviews and replies - since 2006 https://t.co/9X6bqcZ…
Biology Direct pioneered open peer review and has been publishing both reviews and replies - since 2006 https://t.co/9X6bqcZuDL https://t.co/ZBAhGnbA5q