@ludowaltman.bsky.social Do you think cOAlition S has lost or is fast losing trust with a lot of people within the publishing field? In one way, funders like Gates, HHMI, etc. coming out with independent policies will help cOAlition S's cause. But, I'm not sure if their approach would be effective!

Oh yes, @prereview.bsky.social is amazing!

I don't know about vested interests but I think one of the stumbling blocks in P-R-C is due to our lack of clarity & consensus about the "C". We don't know what & how we are going to curate and what that product of curation is gonna look like.

But, yes, transparent, honest, inclusive discussion ✅!

Yes, so then do we also need to define what *changes* are? Should they only be changes in response to peer review or editorial assessment?

I get your point about preprints just getting "branded" analogous to a journal!

For point no. 1, I think we then need to define what constitutes a change! Will it be any kind of a change or those resulting only from peer review/editorial assessment? How will it differ from preprint versioning (which will have a separate DOI ayway)?

I understand that all info could be displayed alongside a preprint. But, don't you think a reviewed preprint, displayed along with review reports (with or without an editorial assessment) & hosted on a different platform could have a separate DOI? "Reviewed preprint" could be a formal category!

I think it's best to have just 1 identifier if there's no particular necessity for the same object to have multiple ones of the same kind. You rightly refer to versioning & the same may apply to any change an object goes through (like withdrawal or retraction)!

Oh, I just read through that part & it sounds crazy! I've always remained sceptical of researcher surveys as I don't know if they actually know what they want...!

(2/2) Formalizing "Reviewed Preprints" as a category will have important implications for the P-R-C model & to meaningfully take forward the work undertaken by preprint reviewing platforms like @reviewcommons.org @prereview.bsky.social @peercommunityin.bsky.social @elife.bsky.social, etc.! #PRC

Preprints need not work against journals, but preprints needn't also be dependent on journals - it'll take quite some time for people to just preprint their work & opt for preprint reviewing (we've just gotten out of not Googling the IF of bioRxiv!!! 😄)!

"To immediately cap APCs risks turning publishers focused on quality into those that may need to focus on quantity..." - APCs have already made publishers focus on quantity (with or without focus on quality)! Sounds ironic!

Okay, thanks!

Being planned as a hybrid event?

Yes, and I think many funders now actibely mandating preprints has the potential to positively influence the research community towards embracing preprintsand preprint review!