And no, I cannot get internet from my phone hotspot, because I cannot connect to both my phone and the target network simultaneously to perform the authentication.

Props to the designers!

Wow, you're right; arXiv enforces a file size limit of 10 MB (not 3, though...). arXiv hosts close to 3 million manuscripts, which at 10 MB each still represents a manageable 30 TB, though I can imagine that they're more concerned about bandwidth (30 million manuscripts/month)

hal.science proudly claims it hosts about 1.5 million papers, which could all fit on a single USB-SSD drive. I would personally send them another USB stick if they lack storage, as long as my manuscript file can be a healthy 5-10 MB.

Thanks for the summary. Familiar scenes from the previous platform

I'm out of the loop. What did Leadership day/do?

What is particularly annoying about this particular platform, is that it will log you out after a set amount of time (instead of a set amount of inactivity). Did you just write out an entire author list for this publication? How about I log you out first so you can do it again?

I'd consider the impact factor to represent the journal's ability to generate citations. Whether that correlates with a positive author experience is anybody's guess. I'd rather see some kind of "social impact factor" that measures the wellbeing of authors, reviewers, and editors.

scirev.org 👈
"SciRev.org is [...] offering researchers the opportunity to share their experiences and select an efficient journal to submit their work." And guess what: "The website is owned and maintained by [...] a non-profit organization located in The Netherlands."

Exactly that! We need to make it more popular amongst our community. And they need to index Seismica!

I'm sure that there are many other journals out there that can act with complacency and negligence, knowing that their reputation is mostly derived from the Impact Factor. We need more push-back from the community to ensure they are meeting their "high quality standard" that we are paying $$$ for.

I just had a manuscript returned to me and my co-authors after almost 3 months since submission. The main reason: we declared funding in the acknowledgements but not in the metadata. I could fill out an "author satisfaction survey", but this will not change anything, and the world deserves to know

I haven't seen those in a long while, but had I filled them out truthfully, half my family and friends could get into my user account at any time. They should have asked more private questions, like "Business address of your drug dealer" or "Name of your second mistress"

This PSA was prompted by an email from Sapienza's IT to renew my password that looked suspiciously like a phishing attempt. When you do notify users, never say "Click here to learn more"...

I indeed suspect an overly-zealous find-replace tool. I initially feared that Overleaf had enabled an AI language tool that automatically "corrected" my writing, but fortunately that was not the case. But given how many scientific terms end with -or, I anticipate more victims of this macro...

I could understand how this could happen for a non-specialist journal, but this journal supposedly specialises in trees. They should have known how to typeset Latin species names.

Want to see for yourself? academic.oup.com/treephys/art.... I will gladly send you a copy if you don't have access.