🇳🇱
The open peer-review process they do at F1000 is exactly what all journals should be doing. I love that they publish the peer review, in detail, right next to the article themselves.
@freemo not sure what's the added value.
@aluaces Trust, by being able to see the peer review process, objections, and their resolution, we can judge the validity of the paper as a reader.
@freemo I usually thought like that, but in the end I came to the conclusion that a paper stands by itself. You don't have to be an expert to judge it, after all, papers are not light reads and require a big effort to the reader to fully understand it, therefore uncovering the possible mistakes it could have.
It does however require an expert to improve and advise the authors about their work, but this process is already shown in the published version of the paper.
Publishing the whole process would unconver bad reviewers, for example, "just everything is good", "just everything is bad", "cite my papers". But the interest is merely anecdotical.
I'm in no way against that idea, I wouldn't object about publishing my reviews, I'm just stating that it seems to me of curious or anecdotical value.
