After the fantastic NCEAS working group on the future of scholarly publishing in EEB (big success – stay tuned for more news on that front!), I participated in a really interesting online discussion about Post-Publication peer review with Carl Boettiger, Jamie Ashlander, and Scott Chamberlain. The conversation was great, and I think brought up a lot of interesting points – both that echoed some discussions in our group and went far beyond them.
There’s a lot of grist for the mill here – what is the roll of post-publication peer review, do we have an efficient system to conduct it, can we do better, and if so, how (and how can we do it simply instead of having to build some whole new platform)?
Take a gander, and I’d love to hear more of your thoughts about how we can better accelerate the pace of the scientific discussion in an efficient way.