Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | mispy's commentslogin

My general feeling after many years of internet use was absolutely to limit anonymity (I'm the current SciRate maintainer). Scientific discourse has its own culture, though, which is a bit different to internet culture in general. And the users seem to like anonymous peer review; we've had requests to make it more anonymous: https://github.com/scirate/scirate/issues/304

So currently I'm adopting a "wait and see" approach wrt. trolling. Stay open unless/until it becomes an issue, but make sure to crack down swiftly if it does. For the moment, we do have comment reports/downvotes and moderators.


The comments SciRate gets at the moment are pretty decent, I think because people mostly just integrate it into their existing review process. https://scirate.com/arxiv/1501.07071 is a good example. If the community were to grow though we'd definitely want heavy moderation.


That does look like a refreshing exchange. The pessimist in me thinks it's a pretty optimal "showcase" example though :P

On a related note, don't some fields/journals (like pharmacology is in my head for some reason) require ref reports to be made public?


I'd note that this theory applies rather poorly to gay feminist developers, but you probably have an even more repugnant hypothesis for that.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: