Timeline for Is there a good site for holding online discussions of scientific papers?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jul 13, 2012 at 19:25 | comment | added | Fomite | @Paul It should be noted that this was originally on Scicomp, so the response was a little cheeky. Though I don't think many of the reasons one might discuss a paper are inherently value judgements and inherently not based on objective technical knowledge. | |
| Jul 13, 2012 at 14:58 | comment | added | Paul | It is my impression that the Scicomp SE is for specific questions pertaining to (mostly) objective technical knowledge and not for subjective value judgments journal papers or research programs. | |
| Jul 10, 2012 at 17:09 | history | migrated | from scicomp.stackexchange.com (revisions) | ||
| Feb 2, 2012 at 9:41 | comment | added | aeismail | @Epigrad: I think the idea is to do a serious discussion of the intellectual merits and disadvantages of individual papers, as well as areas of research. That's somewhat orthogonal to the goal of SE. | |
| Feb 2, 2012 at 7:14 | comment | added | Fomite | @JackPoulson I think that it depends on what you mean by 'discussion'. SciComp is probably the right place for certain types of discussion. Things like 'In the paper by EpiGrad et al., can someone explain to me what they mean by X'? | |
| Feb 2, 2012 at 6:13 | comment | added | Geoff Oxberry | I think the lack of anonymity in a public forum will be a deal-breaker for many due to academic politics and fear of reprisal, even if a review is balanced, tactfully pointing out both strengths and weaknesses. People prefer closed fora to avoid this drawback. | |
| Feb 2, 2012 at 0:26 | comment | added | Jack Poulson | There is value in being able to be blunt with colleagues about your opinions on papers and techniques. I don't think that SciComp is the right place for that. | |
| Feb 1, 2012 at 23:03 | history | answered | Fomite | CC BY-SA 3.0 |