From: Ari Belenkiy <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 6 Feb 2013 17:52:43 -0800

Thank you, Rick.

Rubriq is a very interesting initiative that may revolutionize the
publishing market.

The problem is that a high R-score would not compel a publisher
(editor) to publish.

I would advise Rubriq to start with some "forgotten" (never published)
papers from arXiv - for free! - and to see the result of their
reviews. If the arXiv papers with high R-score would find the
publisher soon then the authors certainly would be interested to try.

This process can be watched directly and statistics can be easily gathered.

Ari Belenkiy


On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 4:08 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 17:53:36 +0000
>
> There's an interview with another alt-peer-review pioneer (Keith Collier
> of Rubriq) in today's Scholarly Kitchen: http://bit.ly/XfmDxA
>
> Rick Anderson
> Interim Dean, J. Willard Marriott Library
> University of Utah
> [log in to unmask]
>
>
> On 2/4/13 4:22 PM, "LIBLICENSE" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> >From: Ann Shumelda Okerson <[log in to unmask]>
> >Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2013 09:06:44 -0500
> >
> >Article that's worth a detour.
> >
> >---------- Forwarded message ----------
> >From: John Duhring <[log in to unmask]>
> >Date: Sun, Feb 3, 2013 at 4:08 PM
> >
> >Is it possible for academic work to be validated and reputations
> >enhanced more broadly than currently practiced?
> >
> >This author/CEO says he thinks so:
> >
> >http://techcrunch.com/2013/02/03/the-future-of-the-scientific-journal-indu
> >stry/
> >
> >John Duhring