Developing news

We're doing a thing! Speakers @HHMINEWS Science Meetings will no longer put journal names on their talk slides.
Instead display first author, year, PMID (or DOI) like @ardemp
Why?
-end prestige-signaling
-people can actually find reference#nojournalnamesontalkslides pic.twitter.com/POe1M45pf6

— Leslie Vosshall PhD (@leslievosshall) October 19, 2022

I’m sympathetic to this idea, but it really makes most sense if the slides are available for download. Otherwise not so productive for me. Taking note of a DOI or PMID would detract from talk (Authors, year and journal name I can just about cope with). https://t.co/Hqt5i9zSgF

— Michael P.H. Stumpf (@theosysbio) October 20, 2022

Here it is! pic.twitter.com/JzfoWscKdy

— Ardem Patapoutian (@ardemp) October 20, 2022

Today, we’re introducing a new model that eliminates accept/reject decisions.

By publishing every paper with eLife reviews as a Reviewed Preprint, we plan to restore autonomy to authors, ensuring that they will be judged by what, not where, they publish. https://t.co/OAsiOVFStI pic.twitter.com/lhnNElQp7y

— eLife – the journal (@eLife) October 20, 2022

Now that I've had a chance to see peoples' questions about @eLife's new publishing model, time for a thread for a thread with some details and answers. https://t.co/tD1BovOzLd

— Michael Eisen (@mbeisen) October 20, 2022

Definitely a bold and radical move by @eLife

Might also be a "courageous decision" (as per Yes Minister)

I look forward to seeing how it develops

But speaking for most of the UK, a period of nondisruptive stability might be appreciated https://t.co/lAx4oeUqS6

— James Briscoe (@briscoejames) October 20, 2022

The debate here has highlighted precisely the reason why it is so important to break the collective reliance upon the venue in which work appears.

— Prachee Avasthi (@PracheeAC) October 21, 2022