|
How can they work or be taken seriously if there is no peer review?
Experts don't have the time to download a paper and check it for all the things a review requires.
The only way I can see it working is if it's kept ín-house, eg. like preprint servers which academic groups provide of their group's work.
If not, you'll just get loads of rubbish posted up on there by people who have been rejected by the academic community and have 'issues' with the review process.
The internet provides a lot of readily available information but it also dilutes knowledge. Let's hope that it doesn't get the chance to dilute new scientific work.
|