Hey look, I have unlocked a new level of predatory publishing fraud: someone out there is automating so aggressively that they are not just misspelling the title of my article and inventing an affiliation for me: they literally can’t be arsed to spell out my name. Of course, there is no one at King’s with…
Here is another gem from today’s mailbag. They are just taking the piss now.
I get a lot of academic spam However, the missive that arrived yesterday looked like the real deal, then made me question my sanity.
There are so many systems that are supposed to document our outputs, talking to each other all the time.
I lead a very sheltered life: before reading this post, I had never suspected that it is possible to hijack an academic journal.
This article on the Duck by Dan Nexon, about rather unfortunate consequences of the publish/perish incentives,makes some very good points
This, from 2021, is still interesting
Sometimes, reviewer 3 turns out to be reviewer 2. But at least it’s unintentionally funny.
Because there is a pandemic, we are improving the home. Because I’ve spent a year in the so-called office (i.e. the box room), the box room office is in particular need of improvement. Because it’s my box room office, it needs an especially good clean-out before there is any possibility of improvement. That’s why I’m…
Here is a new (for me) reason why the peer review process is flawed. Contains a cool simulation