Prof: Love can also be between two men. Students: Slides, please. Prof: Love can even be love for the Motherland. And now the slides. 2/2.

Students: slides, please. Prof: love can be also between men. Students: slides, please. Prof: love can be also to the Motherland. And now slides.

BP: sleuths are people who have too much time to look at misconduct in papers

AF3. Journals are rotten at core. We need entirely new system. And it is not a journal article.

AF2: Peer review is not transparent gatekeepers thing. Peer review requires different types of specialists. Methods can be published separately and peer reviewed by a methods expert. Decisions in journals are taken by few people who are biased (like all humans)

AF1: how many articles can be absolutely reproduced? How many articles have you not published? A journal requires a nice story, a narrative. But this is not how research is done. One of possible consequences are QRP.

Alexandra Freeman, Octopus. Why a format of an article is not how it should be done?

Journals are gatekeepers of quality control which is provided by peer review. Journals prefilter information. And peer review can be weaponized. But good journals know how deal with that. Transparency is important. But credit for peer review is still missing.

Publishing is a victim of research assessment.

probably, they submitted the wrong file. or celebrities didn't reply to their questionnaire, so no data, no results. (paper is devoted to celebrity entrepreneurship).

True. Taking in consideration the language in the conclusions and methods, there is no sign of ChatGPT.

Thanks, Dimity!

Thank you! More projects to come!

Thanks!