• lemonhead2@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 day ago

    not just bann them. but to submit in future, their paper needs to be accepted in a reputable peer reviewed journal

    • Hapankaali@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 day ago

      ArXiv is a place where researchers put papers before they are accepted and peer reviewed (“preprints”). Requiring this would defeat the purpose of arXiv, which is to allow fellow researchers to see material that is not peer reviewed before it is published. Before arXiv, this happened only through informal discussions and meetings during conferences.

      • Fmstrat@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        19 hours ago

        Commentor is not saying they should do this. They are doing this.

        “The penalty is a 1-year ban from arXiv followed by the requirement that subsequent arXiv submissions must first be accepted at a reputable peer-reviewed venue,” Dietterich wrote.

        arXiv has postprints, too, and it means that once a journal has accepted your work, you can prerelease before they publish.

        But yes, they are effectively telling the research community to get their shit together before submitting, or pay the price.

          • Fmstrat@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            11 hours ago

            Yea, I figured! Pretty heavy handed on arXiv’s part, so I’m not surprised by the interpretation. Though, I like the heavy handedness.

        • Hapankaali@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 day ago

          ArXiv uses an endorsement system so that not everyone can post there. However, sometimes dubious “scientists” manage to slip through the cracks, which is why there is moderation for cases such as these.