Comments on: Time for change: open communications in biomedical science http://hematopoiesis.info/2008/04/06/time-for-change-open-communications-in-biomedical-science/ Blood Stem Cell & Lineages Tue, 06 Jan 2009 06:07:38 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1 By: Alex http://hematopoiesis.info/2008/04/06/time-for-change-open-communications-in-biomedical-science/#comment-245 Alex Fri, 11 Apr 2008 16:16:10 +0000 http://hematopoiesis.info/2008/04/06/time-for-change-open-communications-in-biomedical-science/#comment-245 Science should be more public, no doubt. More visual and more easy to digest. It will make science more popular and prestigious. Why should author of high impact papers bother? Well, this is a thing - if comments will able to increase/decrease impact of this work, highlight advantages/disadvantages and ways for improvement.... and even change a content (!) and even meaning of paper it's will be great! That's what future open science platforms are about. Science should be more public, no doubt. More visual and more easy to digest. It will make science more popular and prestigious.

Why should author of high impact papers bother?
Well, this is a thing - if comments will able to increase/decrease impact of this work, highlight advantages/disadvantages and ways for improvement…. and even change a content (!) and even meaning of paper it’s will be great!
That’s what future open science platforms are about.

]]> By: Jae-Won http://hematopoiesis.info/2008/04/06/time-for-change-open-communications-in-biomedical-science/#comment-240 Jae-Won Fri, 11 Apr 2008 03:07:40 +0000 http://hematopoiesis.info/2008/04/06/time-for-change-open-communications-in-biomedical-science/#comment-240 To Alex, My question is why scientists will bother to comment if nearly all of them value high-profile journal publication a lot? i.e. If people who published in Nature and Science, etc.. get a huge publicity, why should they even be bothered to comment if they are popular already? How can we make them participate in the online community? Should science be a prestige for those who manage to publish in a high profile journal? Or should science be more public? If you were in that position, wouldn't you want to publish in Nature, etc.. rather than any new platform for open science? I am just throwing out questions that need to be addressed if open science is to be promoted. -Jae-Won To Alex,
My question is why scientists will bother to comment if nearly all of them value high-profile journal publication a lot? i.e. If people who published in Nature and Science, etc.. get a huge publicity, why should they even be bothered to comment if they are popular already? How can we make them participate in the online community?

Should science be a prestige for those who manage to publish in a high profile journal? Or should science be more public? If you were in that position, wouldn’t you want to publish in Nature, etc.. rather than any new platform for open science? I am just throwing out questions that need to be addressed if open science is to be promoted.

-Jae-Won

]]> By: Alex http://hematopoiesis.info/2008/04/06/time-for-change-open-communications-in-biomedical-science/#comment-232 Alex Thu, 10 Apr 2008 05:24:04 +0000 http://hematopoiesis.info/2008/04/06/time-for-change-open-communications-in-biomedical-science/#comment-232 to Jae-Won - good opinion, I'd agree science for science is a problem of modern academy. I think, developers ahead of the scientists so far, offering many good applications and possibilities for open science. Scientific community so slow unfortunately. Let them start to comment first then try to change commenting system, ironically to Jae-Won -
good opinion, I’d agree science for science is a problem of modern academy.
I think, developers ahead of the scientists so far, offering many good applications and possibilities for open science. Scientific community so slow unfortunately.
Let them start to comment first then try to change commenting system, ironically

]]>