timelfen

@timelfen@assemblag.es

Principal of Forthcoming LLC, a publishing consultancy; Researcher & practitioner of scholarly #publishing & #ScholarlyCommunication; Digital explorer–analog #sailor; https://assemblag.es/@timelfen on Twitter; typos & grammatical mistakes are an expression of my humanity. tfr

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

timelfen, to random

Now starting @sabinaleonelli's seminar, "Towards equitable and cross-disciplinary open science: a philosophical analysis": https://www.crassh.cam.ac.uk/events/41416/. I will try to post some notes and commentary.

timelfen, to random

Just starting now, a symposium on critical perspectives on the metascience reform movement/

https://www.cos.io/critical-perspectives-on-the-metascience-reform-movement

joeroe, to random
@joeroe@archaeo.social avatar

Is there a simplified version of the CRediT (https://credit.niso.org/) taxonomy of contributor roles out there? I love the idea but never got why anyone would care about about the four different types of manager or whether someone "curated" or "collected" the data used in a paper.

#ScientificPublishing #OpenScience #OpenAccess

timelfen,

@dta_cthomas @christof @joeroe Isn’t this the problem that any taxonomy meant to cover a broad territory of practices is going to face? It recognizes distinctions from some communities that aren’t significant for others, while important roles are missing entirely from those communities slightly off the map. So we either have broadly implemented taxonomies that poor fit most of the labeled practices or locally relevant ones narrowly deployed. c’est la vie.

timelfen,

@dta_cthomas @christof @joeroe I write this even while realizing just how different the use of “editor” is in my neck of the humanities/social sciences from the relations entailed by CRediT and its implementation in the publishing platform I’m using as a journal “editor” (and that my corner of scholarship cares little about this kind of crediting).

neuralreckoning, to random
@neuralreckoning@neuromatch.social avatar

"the challenges that science is experiencing now ... are due to a lack of emphasis on ... the hard intellectual labor of choosing, from the mass of research, those discoveries that deserve publication in a top journal"

🤔

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/science.ado3040

timelfen,

@jonny @neuralreckoning @MarkHanson @brembs

I like your take on this, & it’s not far off what I ask the scholarly communities I consult w/: “Why are you involved in publishing? What is it you want or expect a publication to do (& for who specifically)?”

These kinds of questions need to be answered before we get into the weeds of what a venue might look like & options for achieving it within existing constraints.

timelfen,

@jonny @neuralreckoning @MarkHanson @brembs

My question for you in this convo is: What if, after thoughtful deliberation, the answer is “We think this kind of journal (or journal-like-thing) would serve our community well”? Should we treat these poor souls as delusional, captured, or insufficiently imaginative. Or is this answer within the realm of possibility (for us)? How would we recognize if/when this is a good answer?

timelfen, to random

Another report out from @ithaka_sr on scholarly communication infrastructure.

https://sr.ithaka.org/blog/shared-infrastructure-for-the-second-digital-transformation-of-scholarly-publishing/

brembs, to random
@brembs@mastodon.social avatar

In the light of recent publications, it doesn't hurt to go over a few simple calculations yet again:

"even when considering all services we don’t currently pay for, the true cost per paper would not exceed $100"

https://blog.joss.theoj.org/2019/06/cost-models-for-running-an-online-open-journal

This fits very well with what we have calculated:

https://f1000research.com/articles/10-20/v2
and of course many others as well (references in our paper). Remember, if someone tells you academic publishing costs more, they're not doing it right

timelfen,

@brembs Björn, what it is going to take to get you to stop making these blithe universalist statements, lacking any nuance or seeming regard for the many ways that publishing happens?

Sure, many journals are well served by a low-touch / volunteer labor models. Many others are not. The question shouldn’t be “How cheap?” but “Does the form of publishing serve the goals of the intellectual community it serves?” This will take many different forms & levels of cost.

timelfen,

@brembs And yes, this is me explicitly saying “If someone tells you academic publishing should always cost $100 per article, they’re not doing it right.”

That’s different from saying “publishing can cost $100,” or even “much more of publishing would be served just as well at $100.” But you never add any qualifiers.

You think you’re sticking it to the commercial publishers w/ these statements. I think you’re sticking it to your fellow scholars w/ other publishing practices.

timelfen,

@jonny @brembs To start with, any that require paid labor, where the majority of the costs of publishing lie. So in any communities where author-provided camera-ready docs doesn’t work, or where managing & copy editors are needed, or where technical services can’t be reliably sourced through volunteers, etc.

Say more on “where costs are borne”: I’m not sure I I understand what you are asking.

petersuber, to random

"The number of issued for research articles in 2023 has passed 10,000 — smashing annual records…Retractions are rising at a rate that outstrips the growth of scientific papers."
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-03974-8

PS: We can all list some of the factors at work here, and we should. My start: Paying more attention to where a work is published, and the fact of publication itself, than to the quality of what is published.

timelfen,

@petersuber Peter, can you clarify what you are saying in your post script? I think you are saying we should pay less attention to where an article is published and more to the quality of the articles. And I think your implying that they (assessors) are doing the opposite. Is that right?

timelfen, to random

Any economic anthropologists out there want to have a crack at this initiative, a system where scholars earn "review tokens," which they can exchange when they want to have their own work reviewed. It is call Reciprocal Reviews:

#PeerReview #AlternativeCurrencies
#MoralEconomies

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RHirbCdQFxBeCbjAAbba1MJtxDOG4cuml66_xWGgXAI/edit#heading=h.gtlebyp3cvjf

inquiline, to Anthropology
@inquiline@union.place avatar

Looking forward to reading Dominic Boyer’s new book No More Fossils @UMinnPress. Somehow appropriate to have a Formica tabletop as the background for this snapshot

#sts #Anthropology #NewBooks #Energy #EnvHum

timelfen,

@inquiline Dominic's earlier monograph (part of a duograph, the other part written by Cymene Howe) on a wind-energy project in Mexico, is also available open access.

https://www.dukeupress.edu/energopolitics

@UMinnPress & @dukepress !]

timelfen, to random

A short note on open science done wrong, from @devezer & @bart.

"Scientific Reform, Citation Politics and the Bureaucracy of Oblivion," in Quantitative Science Studies

https://doi.org/10.1162/qss_c_00274

inquiline, to random
@inquiline@union.place avatar

deleted_by_author

    •
    timelfen, (edited )

    @inquiline @passenger I used to drive by the hangers on the way to the shopping center in Tustin. Was a little shocked to see a subdivision of suburban houses go up right in their shadow. The whole thing was very SoCal.

    petergleick, (edited ) to random

    Math.

    timelfen,

    @petergleick University ranking formula revealed!

    stefanlaser, to fediverse
    @stefanlaser@social.tchncs.de avatar

    Is anyone using @bookwyrm for academic ?

    Bookwyrm might be a good place to collect all kinds of academic reviews in an open space aka the . One could even automate things, or invite for review texts through Mastodon or email (with a Python script translating the different categories). Maybe the academic instance would need a slightly different design, without ratings, and cover images being less prominent. Yet there's potential.

    timelfen,

    @inquiline @stefanlaser @bookwyrm I don’t know of scholarly communities using Bookwyrm but it looks like it would be an interesting space for experimentation. I think the way to start is to get already-established communities to play around w/ it.

    The good folks at @hello might be worth contacting about it as they’ve been thinking abt the fediverse as a potential site for & model of new forms of scholarly communication.

    hugo, to random
    @hugo@assemblag.es avatar

    serious question: does anyone out there have recommendations for a favourite, independent, open-access publisher in the art-research-critique-design-practitioner space, who might be interested in an experimental anthology of short transdisciplinary texts on broadly environmental themes?

    timelfen,

    @hugo @yetiinabox Of the publishers involved with COPIM, I'd look especially at punctum books, which has published many a weird book that doesn't fit typical genre constraints. They publish all books in both open-access digital & in print editions: https://punctumbooks.com

    timelfen,

    @hugo @yetiinabox They are a stalk-worthy press!

    MarkHanson, to SciComm

    The strain on scientific publishing 📄:

    The publishing sector has a problem. Scientists are overwhelmed, editors are overworked, special issue invitations are constant, research paper mills, article retractions, journal delistings… JUST WHAT IS GOING ON!?

    Myself, pablo, @paolocrosetto and Dan have spent the last few months investigating just that.
    https://arxiv.org/abs/2309.15884

    A thread🧵1/n

    image/png

    timelfen,

    @jonny @MarkHanson To add to Jonny's comment, this is good empirical work but more needs to be done to situate the recent shifts, both historically & within the larger institutional dynamics of science. Publishers reflect/refract the incentive structures of their customers (both authors & institutions), which means publishers aren't best analyzed as the only entities with agency.

    This is a useful place to start contextualizing what has lead us to the current conjucture: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12108-016-9315-z

    timelfen, to random

    Who better than university-press editor & author of a book on ideas about gift economies to pull back the curtain on the shared economic & working conditions of academics & UP publishing staff? I’ve been waiting for someone to bring The Social Life of Things & object biographies to bear on the analysis of scholarly publishing for a long time: Rebecca makes a start.

    But I’m mainly happy to see the ringing call for solidarity btwn scholars, publishers, & librarians.

    https://www.publicbooks.org/publishers-and-scholars-unite/

    timelfen, to random

    The historians assess their infrastructural turn: https://doi.org/10.1017/mah.2023.2

    magnus, (edited ) to sts
    @magnus@assemblag.es avatar

    I am looking for historical accounts of geophysical exploration and oil prospecting in the 1950s in the US. Can you recommend anything? @sts, @histodons, @inquiline

    timelfen,

    @magnus Geof Bowker's first book might cover some of this territory.

    https://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262023672/science-on-the-run/

    timelfen, to random

    Does anyone know if there are any still operational Twitter thread extractors? I'm trying to turn the tweets into text.

    jonny, to random
    @jonny@neuromatch.social avatar

    trying to do this weird thing where I don't make a fancy website before making the actual thing the website is for. settled for a 20m landing page.

    https://piracy.solutions

    timelfen,

    @jonny Perhaps something like “parasite” as theorized by Michel Serres, but this isn’t necessarily (directly or indirectly) oppositional. A different public presentation than piracy but not unrelated in its positioning.

    For classic & enigmatic paper on these types of relations, see Kockelman: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1395.2010.01077.x

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • provamag3
  • InstantRegret
  • mdbf
  • ethstaker
  • magazineikmin
  • GTA5RPClips
  • rosin
  • thenastyranch
  • Youngstown
  • osvaldo12
  • slotface
  • khanakhh
  • kavyap
  • DreamBathrooms
  • JUstTest
  • Durango
  • everett
  • cisconetworking
  • Leos
  • normalnudes
  • cubers
  • modclub
  • ngwrru68w68
  • tacticalgear
  • megavids
  • anitta
  • tester
  • lostlight
  • All magazines
    •