"Bad papers don’t get preprinted If the goal was to genuinely share science and advance our collective understanding, why keep it hidden until the journal gatekeepers give their blessing? The truth is, these papers aren’t written for the community. They’re written for CVs, for advancing careers" 🔥

How this hasn't caused bigger outrage and coverage is beyond me. Unelected oligarchs dictating dangerous and authoritarian views. Yet we allow them into our deepest public and defend systems.

And of that 1% the overwhelming majority are simply repackaging current systems and shifting goalposts, not actually solving anything. Not to mention going about them in non-scientific and values-devoid manner.

My big issue with Diamond OA has always been sustainability, particularly over the long term - in addition to the issue that this just copies many of the issues in publishing currently. In the recent journalology newsletter James makes a very good point....

Honestly I wish I could vote for AOC! Breath of fresh air in politics and someone who seems to genuinely place other above personal gain, which is so rare these days (& not just in politics)

It’s refreshing to see a Congressional Committee calling out Jay Bhattacharya for his anti-vaccine stances, using clear, direct language democrats-energycommerce.house.gov/sites/evo-su...

Preprinting is still not a maintsream activity (~11-13% of biomed lit) and preprint peer review is very much a fringe activity (~2% of preprints). So why are we putting so much money and discussion time into preprint peer review without first prioritising the thing it relies on?

After ~7 years I am no longer part of the ASAPbio community - as staff or community member (so you won't reach me there anymore incl. in the slack) I am forever grateful to Jessica for the chance to get involved and contribute to something I care so deeply about.

Simple rule: If you're still posting on X, then you're not allowed to accuse anyone else - whether a person, organisation, or group - of inaction towards intolerance.

What's needed is investment in research infrastructure, permanent positions for scientists and technicians, baseline budget for labs, etc. Not more grant money for the happy few. 6/6

No they shouldn't. The data shows that it leads to relatively limited improvements but (no data yet) there's a potential enormous cost to introducing this perverse incentive. I've been looking into researchub (who pay reviewers) and there's some very questionable behaviours.

Replication remains valuable for evidence accumulation, calibration, and characterizing variability. But replicability rate is NOT a demarcation criterion. Replicability rate-based verdicts on fields are INVALID. If there is a crisis in science, it cannot be established by these methods.

People seem to view publishers as bad due to their monopoly & therefore the answer is simply more competition....It's a very capitalist view of something that should be approached as a public good/service We need standards & a unified backbone - more akin to UK NHS not US health service nightmare

Are there any really good examples of institutional preprint policies? not funders but universities or research institutions. I'm looking for case studies for a preprint course I'm putting together :) #preprint #academicsky#openscience

I do miss London! Especially on days like this when it's summery and gorgeous!

I would absolutely love to live in California (San Fran specifically*). * with appropriate salary ofc, that place is expensive. Random thought of the day.

Ooh this is a good article!

Investment in ECRs brings huge benefits to organisations - I've seen it myself in my own work and is why I have always championed them. Empower ECRs 💪 scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2026/04/28/g...

Absolutely fantastic to see such a statement and one that is very much needed. Things appear to be moving in the right direction! I've been trying for a long time to position this kind of cohesive effort and it's something that has been building.

"The replication crisis, if there is one, cannot be established by the methods used to declare it" 🔥 The issues replication raises around material/data sharing are very valuable. Those using it to demonise or leaning into hyperbole have been highly damaging. This should get those people thinking...

This should hopefully stop people directing ASAPbio-related questions towards me. I've not been part of the organisation for a while now. That said, I have my own non-profit focussed on preprints, trust and culture so I'm happy to answer any questions relating to preprints and open science still.

"Are today’s twenty- and thirty-somethings earning more than their parents did at the same age? Yes. But their relative position in society is lower than their parents’ was, and their position relative to their peers and expectations is significantly lower"

Does anyone have access to this article who could send me over a pdf? Lacking an academic affiliation makes trying to do research harder than it should be! Understanding Indian researcher’s perspectives on preprints: insights from a nationwide survey link.springer.com/article/10.1...

Good to see early success with VeriXiv @openaccessmaven.bsky.social! I think it's particularly worth highlighing the data on reach in Africa here as that's a region with generally low preprinting levels so this data is especially encouraging :) blog.gatesopenresearch.org/2026/04/16/v...

Worth being clear that I still fully support preprinting and think they're the best way towards real positive change. However, I have serious concerns with the preprint movement and don't believe it is currently healthy. There's significant dangers (externally and internally) that need addressing

It's out! Perhaps one of the op-eds that has made me most nervous releasing. Taking Richard Poynders arguments as to why OA failed, I apply these to the preprint movement. scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2026/04/14/g...

Octavia E. Butler, 1998:

This is key. It's not like concerns weren't raised. Concerns were ignored. That's happening again in a few other OS spaces where concerns are being ignored and behaviour is not actually that aligned with openness. Also a topic of an Op-ed that is hopefully coming soon!

New business idea. One of those things above a baby's crib that rotate but for adults. For when you have to spend prolonged time looking up - surgery, tattoos etc.

idk how or why but it's the first time i came across this paper by Xiao-Li Meng where he offers this banger (if you'd rather hear it from someone that isn't me): "replication paradox: the more we replicate, the surer we fool ourselves" 🫡

You've heard the acronym - PRC. But what is the Publish Review Curate model and what are the potential benefits, downsides and reality? As far as I'm aware, this is the only "full-picture" overview of the PRC model currently. Find out in our latest video: youtu.be/VPNpkeV_EFQ

I had been (very slowly) developing a mini-documentary looking at the history of preprints, focussing on their adoption in the Life Sciences. Unfortunately, I've had to abandon that project but it would have been a really cool exploration of the space!

These posts are always a brilliant and insightful read! Huge thanks to @steveroyle.bsky.social for spending time doing such analyses and sharing them :) I've used previous code that Steve has shared to do further analysis and even within entire studies :)

When did @riversidefm.bsky.social reduce the free plan to 2 hours total (not per month) and increase their costs so much??? I'm now in the market for an alternative, anyone used Boomcaster?

There's an on-going joke that nobody updates their ORCiD. Here is data showing that mandates & current adoption efforts are simply not working. I'd argue this almost certainly extends out to other efforts that are mandated too. Real change requires a cultural shift and that's hard to achieve.

Mandates don't work. That's the key message from this brilliant analysis of ORCiD adoption. Mandates lead to more profiles but these are inactive and empty. ORCiD consoria membership also does not significantly increase profile completeness.

CRUK stop supporting open access fees Good step but there's definitely a more nuanced dialogue to be had. (I'd love to chat more about this with them too) news.cancerresearchuk.org/2026/04/01/w...

When peer review reports are available do you actually rad them? Never - sometimes - always? Can't do a proper poll but would love some insight. Anyone aware of studies looking into this? #academicsky #scipub #metascience

Getting real fed up of not being given appropriate credit for my contributions to past work. Outright poor academic practices.

Revisiting publishing revenues for a chapter on public history and I'm reminded of the astonishing statistic that UK consumer publishing has annual revenues of £2.5 billion while academic publishing, the bit aimed at the tiny percentage of us working in research, earns £3.5 billion.

Final episode of Preprints in Motion. Asking an important, if uncomfortable, question.

I do love Journey but they've got to have some of the worst music videos. Separate ways....seriously what is that video?

There will be a final episode of Preprints in Motion releasing soon. This will also be the first episode of a brand new podcast from me (title TBC but might just be "Rippling Ideas" - very open to suggestions!).

Love it, may very well propose a session :)

I do think this is a good development, especially if it's coupled with active community engagement to encourage researchers to publish. Moving away from commercial infrastructure was crucial too.

100% this. It's also the thing most people in OS seem to not fully grasp in my experience. Sadly in the preprint space this has particularly changed for the worse. But it's a general problem beyond that too. Nobody seems to fund the right people focussed efforts atm either.

More on this theme in some upcoming op-eds. I still strongly believe preprints represent the best path towards real change but I've become wary of a minority who are hijacking things for personal gain and are gatekeeping. As such, I feel left with no option but to raise these issues.

Is preprinting actually increasing? Both @biorxivpreprint.bsky.social and @medrxivpreprint.bsky.social are increasing but looking at the underlying data reveals a somewhat more concerning picture. 🧵

When teaching about advocacy, I always said that a high level of understanding of the topic your advocating for is absolutely foundational. When people leading reform efforts get the basics wrong, that shows you they are not reliable sources of information and should bring doubts over their work

Even more reason to move towards a wider range of trust signals for research outputs instead of relying solely on things like peer review blogs.lse.ac.uk/impactofsoci... Another Op-ed on this coming soon!