Do you see problems with the for-profit academic publishing system? Take action with us! Publish with diamond open access in 5 years after the pledge activates. Activation happens when a critical mass is reached. https://t.co/Ya1YECebl4 https://t.co/j8CUx1r7aK @projectFOK
Come explore a radically inclusive, open peer-review system designed for academia — and generalised to help ANY community self-organise around what they find valuable.
For all project & community builders, #openscience & #metaresearch advocates, and revolutionaries at heart 🔥
🌱 This Monday 12 May: Seed Council continues!
We’ll review the list of nominated values and start rating them using the #WisdomSystem.
🗓️ Mon 12 May · 8pm AEST / 10am UTC
🔗 https://t.co/hm5tDDP1rP
Come share what you care about — and help grow OHM's 2025 Value Map. 💜
🌱 Seed Council begins Monday!
We’re launching a participatory experiment to define the values that will guide OHM in the year ahead.
Open to anyone who joined OHM Council #1 or watches the recording. 🌍💜
🗓️ Mon 5 May · 10am UTC
🔗 https://t.co/umpHLSLKty
#OpenScience#DeSci
🌱 Huge thanks to everyone who helped launch our new OHM Council Series! 🙏
It was great to share space with such a diverse group, across different backgrounds and locations.
I’m beyond excited for this next phase — launching a hands-on experiment to collectively define OHM’s values for the year ahead.
We’re growing OHM from the ground up — embedding our shared values into its core. 💠
This is an open call for anyone who wants to be part of that process. Beginning this Monday 10am UTC.
👇 Details in the video
Let’s grow the future we want to see — together. 💜🌱
37 OHM-azing humans kicked off our new Council Series this week!
We met, shared, and outlined plans for the year.
Missed it? Here's the recording:
📷 https://t.co/H99aElR0DW
Next up: a hands-on experiment to choose our collective values for OHM (Monday).
Link in shownotes 👇
People, just stop doing Frontiers special issues. Find a nice diamond open access journal, and self-publish and collaboratively peer review the set of papers you all want to write. Do not give Frontiers money. If anything, they hurt your reputation. MDPI is
even worse.
In tijden van bezuiniging kan de academische wereld veel geld besparen door commerciële uitgevers links te laten liggen en over te stappen op Diamond Open Access. Nederland zou hierin een voortrekkersrol moeten pakken, vinden Wim Pouw en Bert Bakker.
https://t.co/8LI01jqDPH
This invitation from MDPI to publish in their new journal called Metrics, after they carefully reviewed my "impressive" work about narrative CVs... which are intended to fight against the misuse of metrics... 🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️
Acceptance to publication in 5.8 days 🤷♀️
📢 Excited to announce 📚 ‘The Discovery of Mind: From Wundt to Neuroimaging’ by Ardi Roelofs! Explore the history of psychology from Wundt’s groundbreaking work to modern neuroimaging. Free via @RadboudUP👉 https://t.co/yzm2DG9qqS #OpenAccess#Psychology#Neuroscience#Mind
Open Mind provides a venue for the highest quality, most innovative work in cognitive science. We are proud to collaborate with @mitlibraries & @HarvardLibrary to fund this journal and champion open and equitable scholarly publishing: https://t.co/o1CIupLUP5 #OAWeek@LanguageMIT
Academics, what makes you still stay here with this app riddled with mysogyny and right wing propaganda? What makes you publish with journals that are known to extract extreme profits from little value added? We really have a problem of collective (in)action
And *that* is the trick.
One journal keeps very high standards & reputation high. The rest of the franchise free rides on that reputation to get $ in.
And as scientists we fall for it like flies -- because it gives us the possibility of free riding on that reputation too.
🤷
Do you see problems with the for-profit academic publishing system? Take action with us! Publish with diamond open access in 5 years after the pledge activates. Activation happens when a critical mass is reached. https://t.co/Ya1YECebl4 https://t.co/j8CUx1r7aK @projectFOK
Publishing science in an effective, reliable and fair way costs money. But the world would be better off if we stopped treating publishing as a transaction and instead treated it as a centrally funded resource with no financial barriers ever for either publishing or reading.
@aemonten PLOS Biology:
Research Article $5,500
Short Reports $5,500
Update Article $3,150
PLOS Medicine:
Research Article $6,300
Do you believe they spend that money to publish a PDF online? Plus, they had almost $26 million in assets in 2022...
About Plos One being a "non-profit"
PLOS Biology:
Research Article $5,500
Short Reports $5,500
Update Article $3,150 🤡
PLOS Medicine:
Research Article $6,300
Do you believe they spend that money to publish a PDF online? Plus, they had almost $26 million in assets in 2022. 🤑
"When researchers pay to publish: results from a survey on APCs in four countries".
Delighted to see this output from the GRIP project and honored to be part of the journey w/ so many talented researchers!
https://t.co/iQ0JdPSy0G