« Covid Diaries: An Optimistic Intermezzo full of joy | Main | On When the Rector (Huizinga) canceled a Nazi »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

F. Contesi

This may well be a (few) step(s) in the right direction but some of the problems (i.e. opacity and referee assignment) with the refereeing process would seem to remain---or even be exacerbated. Publishing more papers and adding prize selection without changing the refereeing process would do that. Changing the refeering process would still be required, e.g. by way of outsourcing refereeing to a transparent and public Internet hive mind, such as the one advocated by https://doi.org/10.1086/719117 , and implementable through https://freelosophy.github.io/ .

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Here's a link to my past blogging (and discussions involving me) at: New APPS.


Blog powered by Typepad