But because of the scale, they have a big bullseye on them - and are a convenient scapegoat. It's easier to say: look at this journal and its terrible editors, or terrible papers. They must be all corrupt and on a mission to destroy science... #OverlyExasperatedEditor 4/
Omg, repeat after me: DORA, DORA, DORA #ScientificPublishing Like, what the actual heck is happening right now (also, 🤮) #OverlyExasperatedEditor
So, @clarivate.com explains how exclusion of citations to retracted papers will work with New and Improved JIF™ #ScientificPublishing #ResearchIntegrity
In other news, if you'd like to study how the Goodhart's Law works, here is your chance #OverlyExasperatedEditor
Dunno what that table at the end is supposed to be, but it is not correct. But perhaps "he had been trained to consider that manipulation giving the opposite results posed technical problems" when presenting poorly conceived arguments #OverlyExasperatedEditor
And then I want you to write up all of this in the most constructive, inoffensive way possible, without suggesting that authors are incompetent or stupid. Would help if you tried not to be misogynist or racist about it too #OverlyExasperatedEditor 15/
I guess it's June again #OverlyExasperatedEditor
(You do want to read that!)
Interesting new low point in editor-author interactions (will tell the story another time). But Zeus, have mercy on me! #OverlyExasperatedEditor #ScientificPublishing
Which, given that we only just started fleshing out what they are for and how to use them, it's pretty sad. #OverlyExasperatedEditor 3/3
The fact that I need to keep explaining why is not ok to accuse people of fraud just because you don't like their results or interpretation of data is honestly why we're in the publishing bog we're in #OverlyExasperatedEditor
Thank Zeus for @lindaunobel meetings; how else would we remember that Nobel Prize winners are often detached from reality and not experts on everything #OverlyExasperatedEditor
The "favourite" enfant terrible is sharing more thoughts on the lost independence of publishers. The guilty, as always, is the open access #OverlyExasperatedEditor 1/
https://www.the-geyser.com/no-longer-self-governing/
Cat has done way too many of those "write the letter you'd like to send, then delete and send a sanitised version" emails today.
I generally tend to sympathise with authors a lot, but today's lot, oh dear Zeus, spare me #OverlyExasperatedEditor #PeerReviewWarStories
Oh dear Thor...
"Results not interesting enough because cannot be generalized beyond studied population, and so broad utility uncertain."
Population studied: all of China (so you know, 18% of the world).
#OverlyExasperatedEditor
I'm waiting for that day when someone who in a fit of rage throws around insults and accusations, after learning and understanding that they were wrong - apologises.
Honestly, I just want for someone, anyone to apologise to me for once #OverlyExasperatedEditor
Reply to a student sharing a story of the first paper desk rejection. Let's agree that this is *not* helpful advice #OverlyExasperatedEditor #AcademicChatter
What is "holding a critique hostage"?
This is an accusation that editors often see when considering letters to editor, and it can hardly ring more false #OverlyExasperatedEditor 1/
Broke: editor, I asked authors for data two years ago and nothing happened, help please.
Woke: editor, I asked authors for data last night. It's been 7 hours and 23 minutes and still no reply. How about you retract?
#OverlyExasperatedEditor
When did we forget how time works??
Most reviewers hate being asked to re-review after typo correcting revisions.
Meet The Reverse Reviewer: when not asked to do this, contacts jrnl after publication of the paper to complain wasn't asked & to demand editor's explanation for the decision #OverlyExasperatedEditor
After explaining to an author why the mess they made may take some time to fix, an email:
"So do you think we can have it resolved by tomorrow?"
I mean... Office hours, time zones, and my 3 hours sleep a night aside, no, I still don't think we can #OverlyExasperatedEditor
Another day, another "You know that paper your rag published that I don't like, when are you going to retract it?" comment...
Reasons, btw, are: I worry others will misinterpret the paper and I have issues about presentation. I kid you, f*cking, not #OverlyExasperatedEditor
You're periodic reminder. Because some old fart is at it again, apparently #OverlyExasperatedEditor
Emails really need to have an "I want to opt out from this Reply All chain" option #OverlyExasperatedEditor
A corollary of sorts: being correct about other people being wrong doesn't give anyone right to being a d*ck #OverlyExasperatedEditor
Good old "our paper is fine because it was reviewed before publication so there", dear friend, how I missed you #OverlyExasperatedEditor
You know that cute in-joke you smuggled into your paper? Is not cute at all, and you've been warned #OverlyExasperatedEditor
Can we all agree that "I told the authors the way they did their experiments is stupid and they are liars, and they did not respond to me" is not a legitimate complaint you should be sending to an editor? #OverlyExasperatedEditor
That time when you ask someone for the umpteenth time for the raw WB image for their paper and they feign ignorance, and then see them comment sarcastically under one of the @MicrobiomDigest tweets about some problematic paper... Sigh-oh-sighity-sigh #OverlyExasperatedEditor
So if you email someone and hit their out of office saying they are not in for a week or two, what do you think are the chances of them replying to a chase sent on their first day back in the office? #AskingForAFriend #OverlyExasperatedEditor
And then I want you to write up all of this in the most constructive, unoffensive way possible, without suggesting that authors are incompetent or stupid. Would help if you tried not to be misogynist or racist about it too #OverlyExasperatedEditor 13/
