Re: [tlug] Journals, Authors and 'Free Peer Review'

[Raymond Wan <rwan.kyoto@example.com>]

On Tuesday, September 25, 2018 11:22 PM, Benjamin Kowarsch 
wrote:
> On 25 September 2018 at 23:56, Raymond Wan 
> <rwan.kyoto@example.com <mailto:rwan.kyoto@example.com>> wrote:
>     Personally, I still would rather take my vacation than use
>     ArXiv as my motivator.  But that's just me...
> I don't understand what you are trying to say.


Ok...  Well, you spent some time explaining that ArXiv 
provides a venue for your to upload your work.  By having 
such a venue, it motivates you to tidy up work so that you 
can get it done for others to read.  Journals may not accept 
such work.

I'm trying to say that I (personally) wouldn't consider 
ArXiv as a motivator to get work done.  But, I can see why 
it can be for you (and others) but hopefully you can see it 
may not be for me (and possibly others as well).


> There is nobody on any grant committee anywhere who is under 
> the illusion
> that 100% of a researchers papers could ever make it into a 
> journal.


Sure.  But that isn't what I said but maybe I have a problem 
conveying it.

Grant committees know a lot of papers do not get published. 
But whether we like it or not, many of them favour those 
that do get published and ignore those that do not -- and 
that could be ones that never saw the light of day *or* gets 
uploaded to a pre-print server.

No, it isn't fair, but for *some* grant committees (perhaps 
not all), that's the way it is.


> You do not need to hide the 6 out of 7 articles that did not 
> get published in
> any peer reviewed journal from any hiring manager,
>
> nor do you need to hide those 6 out of 7 articles from any 
> grant committee.


I think we're assuming journals and ArXiv as if it's one or 
the other.  In between, there are many other options -- 
lower tier journals, conferences, symposiums, poster 
sessions, etc.  If we fail with one, we can try another. 
Any of these would be peer reviewed as well (and some are not).

There are many options available and I presume on a CV, one 
would separate the various types of publications into 
categories.

And whether we like it or not, uploads to ArXiv can be 
reported on a CV, but would have to fall under the 
"Unpublished" category.  I didn't say anything about 
"hiding" it -- but we do have to call it what it is...and it 
would be considered "Unpublished" or "Not peer-reviewed" by 
many.

Ray