Date Added: Oct 2009
The whole discussion of excellence versus quality is extremely relevant, but also one where it is extremely difficult to point to concrete actions. One in which one works with renewed peer review as part of the parallel publishing is an interesting idea, but it will in the authors opinion get widely accepted with difficulty. What is the added value for the user? Is this enough value for them to find it worthwhile to use the extra time? The introduction of "Great conversation" to characterize the research process is interesting to play with. A conversation, however, requires many learned skills such as language and grammar.