• Allero@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    Probably won’t take off because scientists need reputable journals and not some random fediverse publishers.

    Is it fucked up? Absolutely. But something else needs to be changed before this would be possible.

    Also, why not ditch the concept of a “publisher” to begin with? Why not have a national or international article index, graded by the article level? It’s not that we live in a paper era, and for those who still need it, we can always print.

    • Jocker
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Exactly, a decentralized platform would only make an index and universities or institutions can maintain their own instances

    • philpo@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 months ago

      Well, we could assign the reviewers more “significance” here. We could give them points and if they “upvote” a paper it gives the paper a bit more visibility/reputation. If the reviewer has actually reviewed the paper it gives the paper more points.

      How much a reviewer is able to “spend” could be based on the reputation of the institution, their own papers in the same field and the points they get for their reviews by other users.

      Just a raw idea,but it seems possible, indeed.

      • Allero@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        Interesting concept for an open collaboration!

        Should also address the misuse of the points when some large researcher doesn’t care to peer review and may give power to someone else, or hacking leading to spending of points, or whatever threats there can be