Comments on: PubCreds: Paying for journal submissions with reviews… or maybe we should just use money

By: No peer review crisis after all? | Jabberwocky Ecology

No peer review crisis after all? | Jabberwocky Ecology — Tue, 28 Dec 2010 21:19:12 +0000

[...] had a bit of discussion here at JE about potential solutions to the tragedy of the reviewer commons, so I [...]

By: Becky

Becky — Wed, 29 Sep 2010 16:36:25 +0000

The one advantage of the proposed PubCred system over money is that if nobody respects your opinion enough to ask you to review anything you will eventually have to stop publishing. I foresee a new kind of lobbying of journal editors — pick me to review, I need the credits! Superficially that sounds good, but I bet it would be a huge nuisance in practice. Especially in very small or controversial fields where there are few people you really trust to give you a thoughtful response.

By: Ethan

Ethan — Wed, 04 Aug 2010 01:42:55 +0000

Thanks Jarret! I fixed the link. I guess that explains why the pingback didn’t go through

By: jebyrnes

jebyrnes — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 20:15:23 +0000

Great post! Fyi – I think the link to my post actually goes to the main article.

By: “Privatizing” the Reviewer Commons? « i’m a chordata! urochordata!

“Privatizing” the Reviewer Commons? « i’m a chordata! urochordata! — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 20:14:53 +0000

[...] For more thoughtful discussion see this post at Jabberwocky Ecology and a thoughtful response by Fox and [...]

By: Why PubCred is both easy to implement and better than real money [Guest post] « Jabberwocky Ecology

Tue, 03 Aug 2010 18:13:08 +0000

[...] PubCred is both easy to implement and better than real money [Guest post] After posting about PubCreds I emailed the authors of the original article to invite a response because: 1) it’s only fair [...]