[GOAL] Re: Unnecessary Services

[Thomas Krichel]

  Michael Eisen writes

> There is no evidence that post publication review can assure quality, I
> agree. But there is a wealth of evidence that pre-publication review DOES
> NOT assure quality, and it is absurd to spend $10b a year and delay the
> open availability of typical papers by 10 months to achieve it.

  10 months? That's fast. In economics it's more like four years.

  Which brings me to another point. The requirements for peer review
  and the benefits of a pre-publication peer review system are largely
  discipline specific. A quack medical paper can lead to people dying,
  but an error on the 17th page of a 22-page theoretical mathematical
  proof is probably not that problematic. 

-- 

  Cheers,

  Thomas Krichel                  http://openlib.org/home/krichel
                                              skype:thomaskrichel