I’ve had this idea that we should have server dedicated to people just putting their research. Other people can review and get responses/improve it.
People new to science and students can reproduce the results and validate them. And of course we can have upvotes system (i worry about this as everyone have same weight of vote seems dumb, so maybe everyone gets points for contributions and votes are based on the person’s credibility/points).
Our current system is too expensive and only profitable to journal systems. We could make a system where people can donate when they submit a paper and the money goes to reviewer/server/papers they cited, etc. and we lack reproducing results because there’s no credit, giving credit for that would encourage learning and make sure papers are reproducible. If a lot of people tried and can’t reproduce it, we can doubt the results.
An equal points voting system is the best way to come to the truth between a group of people, but they all have to be honest with their oppinions, which can make it fall apart if there are outside forces pressuring voters. If you have a jar of marbles and have a room full of people try to guess how many there are, the guesses will generally average out to the correct answer. If you had a group of marble and math experts guessing, then it would be extremely close, unless you let them debate about it first.
I’ve had this idea that we should have server dedicated to people just putting their research. Other people can review and get responses/improve it. People new to science and students can reproduce the results and validate them. And of course we can have upvotes system (i worry about this as everyone have same weight of vote seems dumb, so maybe everyone gets points for contributions and votes are based on the person’s credibility/points).
Our current system is too expensive and only profitable to journal systems. We could make a system where people can donate when they submit a paper and the money goes to reviewer/server/papers they cited, etc. and we lack reproducing results because there’s no credit, giving credit for that would encourage learning and make sure papers are reproducible. If a lot of people tried and can’t reproduce it, we can doubt the results.
An equal points voting system is the best way to come to the truth between a group of people, but they all have to be honest with their oppinions, which can make it fall apart if there are outside forces pressuring voters. If you have a jar of marbles and have a room full of people try to guess how many there are, the guesses will generally average out to the correct answer. If you had a group of marble and math experts guessing, then it would be extremely close, unless you let them debate about it first.