Replies

I don't have a problem with a certain number of scientists paid from my taxes doing this on purpose, because it is necessary to prove that another's ground breaking research is valid. But I'd also like to see scientists informed enough about what has already gone on to take the next step from there. Standing on one another's shoulders is easier when one knows where others' shoulders have gone to already. Requiring the results to be free to public view, warts and all, if paid for by the public purse, is a must.

"Requiring the results to be free to public view, warts and all, if paid for by the public purse, is a must."

I think the "Amazon model" would work for ALL scientific publication. Accept the paper after editorial review (NOT, note, "peer review"), invite a couple of anonymous reviewers, post the paper AND the anonymous reviews on "journal website", and then let ANYONE post further "reviews" (sort of analogous to the existing Free Republic process with the addition of the "official" anonymous reviews).

Pay for it with Google-style advertising links.