@petermurrayrust@biorxiv Thanks, Peter. A few of your points are factually wrong about permanence or responsibility to authors. Happy to discuss at length in a call. Unfortunately Twitter isnt designed for the kind of lengthy discussion you're pointing to, but more than happy to have it elsewhere.
@petermurrayrust 7/7 If you would like to speak about this more at length, please let me know and we can set up a call. Your feedback (especially the at length kind one can get over the phone rather than via social media) would be invaluable to me.
@petermurrayrust 6/7 As for governance of the platform, I am currently putting together an advisory board and thinking through this structure generally so would love to have a fuller discussion with you on this.
@petermurrayrust 6/7 and collaborate with them from a product point of view). I also believe research benefits from a diverse infrastructure ecosystem that includes for- and not-for-profit entities. I realise you might disagree. :-)
@petermurrayrust 6/7 We are a for-profit, privately owned organisation. I cannot predict what will happen in the future, Peter. Yes, you are correct that we could be bought by a larger organisation. I see huge benefit in community-driven initiatives and open infrastructure (and hope to support
@petermurrayrust 6/7 We welcome the opportunity to work more closely with them and reaching out to bioRxiv is on my list of things to do. While there is some obvious overlap, I see the opportunity for collaboration and mutual benefit as greater than that overlap.
@petermurrayrust 5/7 We see ourselves as part of a wider preprint ecosystem that includes bioRxiv amongst others. We accept all subject areas of preprints. bioRxiv and the other subject specific servers play an important role in their communities.
@petermurrayrust 4/7 and accessible and ultimately speeding up the peer review process. Our business model is to support this free preprint sharing and some free tools and resources for authors by selling some paid-for services, such as language editing or video abstracts.
@petermurrayrust 3/7 This partly happens through public preprint sharing and we hope to better build out community “review/feedback” functionality to enable this. We also plan to do this via a suite of free and paid-for resources, tools, and services aimed at making research more reproducible...
@petermurrayrust 2/7 Our mission is to provide a staging ground for research, empowering researchers and their communities to improve and build on their work before it becomes part of the scientific record.
Call for proposals due next week: Submit a course proposal for the Force11 Scholarly Communications Institute (FSCI) by November 18 - Join the community of #FSCI teachers and learners - New and returning instructors are welcome! #force11 https://t.co/qmS18ZIS68
In Review, an innovative preprint author service, has reached 2,000 submissions! Read our Q&A with Editorial Director for Medicine & Life Sciences, @AmyeKenall to learn more about the value it provides & how it’s disrupting the current preprint landscape https://t.co/A2dny3H6li