Read on Twitter
Counterpoint: If you think that the current world in which published science is peer reviewed has flaws (and it certainly does), wait until you see what a world without peer review looks like. /1 https://twitter.com/siminevazire/status/1259363923037323264
Yes, it's cool to post a bunch of my new ideas as a preprint, to the admiration of my friends, many of whom are active members of the preprint advocacy community. /2
But the only reason this works, on a very limited scale, is if the people who post preprints are doing it in the right spirit. Until now, the people who have been posting preprints have mostly been people who think deeply about their science. /3
However, that only works if people play the game. As I understand it, the ostensible point of preprints is to get feedback and improve the paper before some formalisation of its status (whether that's publication in a journal or, e.g., archiving at @theWinnower). /4
And in turn that only works within the context of a scientific community with some minimal form of gatekeeping. I don't want 5G conspiracists commenting on my COVID-19 virology preprint. /5
I certainly don't want 5G conspiracists, of whom a few actually have PhDs, writing preprints & calling the media to demand coverage of "new proof of the devastating viruses caused by 5G" written by "a scientist from prestigious uni X" on "prestigious preprint server bioRxiv". /6
I worry that preprints will be a bit like organic food: An indulgence for the scientific equivalent of the well-off middle classes, only sustainable because it's what only a minority of people do.(*) /7
(*) It seems to me that the production of organic food, at least in the way it's done at present in western countries, is too dependent on the existence of a (non-organic) meat industry for fertiliser to be inherently sustainable. YMMV. /8
I will declare some hypocrisy here. First, I have in the past talked to the media ( @TheEconomist) about at least one preprint (GRIM) of mine. They called me, but I didn't say "Oh no, it's only a preprint, don't write about it yet". It's usually fun to see your name in print. /9
Second, my name is on four preprints, one as lead author, that might never be submitted to a journal. They became preprints because the various authors had something to write up that we thought was worth more than a blog post but haven't found the energy to submit formally. /10
So we get much of the benefit of having these "publications" out there (including Google Scholar citations and h-index points) but without anyone challenging the work. (The total number of comments on all four preprints after a few hundred downloads is zero.) /11
Summary: Be careful what you wish for (e.g., a world without gatekeepers). You might well get it. And remember, once you've opened a can of worms, you need a bigger can to get them back in. /12 /end
