Happy to share privately.

I've spent all day yesterday and so far today trying to get this to work. It's probably incredibly simple too

I've also seen a fair few of the discussions those pushing PRC have had and they're not giving full thought to the unintended consequences, nor are they receptive to dissenting voices (which isn't very open of them).

PRC is basically what we already have. I'm all for experiments but the effort behind PRC to make it the next thing, at the expense of other experiments, just feels like it's going to come back and bite us all

The things openRxiv are working on are very exciting.

The expansion of signals of trust and quality beyond peer review is exciting.

The possibilities of doing peer review in a different way are exciting (most PRC efforts don't really achieve this)

But I agree with your perspective but then I may also be pessimistic at this point.

The preprint aspect is great but I'm very concerned that a focus on PRC is actually going to end up causing a lot of damage.

I'm not sure* why that is specifically called out when there are much more exciting and forward thinking experiments going on with preprints as the core.

*I have suspicions

My emails also seem to keep ending up in spam folders so please do check if you're expecting an email from me

Love this! I really should get more involved with forrt

I get the concerns with AI as the savior of every problem, the training and copyright issues and ethics etc.

But as a tool for author feedback? Is it really that harmful?

In the case of being used to assess quality or reliability, peer review categorically fails - there's not exactly a shortage of evidence to that either. Yet so many people put enormous faith into that process.

Why not have multiple different methods of feedback?

We can only move forward by taking risks and trying things. They might not work. But if we're conscious and react appropriately to that then it's still significantly better than what we currently do

Kindness is too often missing from academia. There's some amazing scientists who are kind but it gets overshadowed by the (probably) minority who aren't.

Obvs not just academia but it does feel particularly unkind in the systems and people.

I've got a big metascience research program on the go, a new podcast under development, new YouTube efforts, multiple articles being written and so so much more!

My goal remains as it always was: to change scientific publishing, placing preprints at the core and realising their potential for change

@ripplingideas.bsky.social will allow me to continue all of this work either as a funded organisation or as one that I use alongside a different role.

I very much intend on remaining very active in this space; contributing my expertise, viewpoint and effort.