Stuff we've discussed on IRC.
Posted by azz at 2006-02-08 19:30
Reinventing how scientific peer review works.
The way that scientific publication usually works is: you write up some work, you submit it to a journal, the journal gets a load of experts in that field to review it, (optionally returns the anonymised reviews to you so you can fix problems,) and the journal publishes the paper if the experts are happy with it.
What Biology Direct are doing is publish everything they receive along with the reviews.
This has the problem that it devalues publication in itself -- saying "I got X published in BD" doesn't mean anything -- and that it'll dissuade all but the very thick-skinned from writing negative reviews.
Indeed, the only places currently that publish everything they receive are the scam conferences that exist solely to make money off the conference fees (think vanity publishing).
But, that said, it's quite possible to get a paper accepted without addressing all the points your reviewers made, and this avoids that problem.