Call for Papers: RepRap Innovation Academic Articles Wanted

Hi All,

For those of you in academia who would like a little credit for the work you have done on the RepRap project -- I cordially invite you to submit a paper to a special issue of "Innovations in 3-D Printing" that I am guest editing for the Journal: Inventions. More information: [www.mdpi.com]

It is a fully open access journal and there will be no APC or fees for you.

Even for those not directly involved with academia this represents an opportunity to "mine the IP space" around 3-D printing by publishing your innovations around the RepRap project both realized and theorized in the peer-reviewed literature.

I look forward to your submissions.

All the best,
Joshua Pearce

Peer review is a joke. Look at what that process has given us in the climate change arena! Now they have peer reviewed transgenderism. Hell you can prove anything with peer (Pal) review.

Just like democracy, peer review is horrible but like democracy it is better than any alternatives that have been tried.

BTW, can you cite me any any significant peer reviewed papers about climate change that were wrong?

Mike

Einstein, Currie, and many other famous scientists never had peer reviews. I wonder how they succeeded. Peer reviews are a silly idea and was only started 40 years ago. Every peer reviewed paper connecting C02 with world temperature(what ever that is?), is wrong. Every forecast of doom and fire has been wrong. Oh but they were peer reviewed by some quack at a silly magazine. So we have spent vast amounts trying to reduce C02 when it isn't even a player, all based on peer review and the lies of the UN. Now transgenderism and 29 different sexes have been identified and peer reviewed. How many examples does it take to show the system if screwed up. I don't want to participate, but I feel others should know that having a peer reviewed article doesn't really have much value.

Am I correct, If you put the information out like this, It becomes public knowledge.
And it Cannot be copyrighted or Patented being public knowledge.

And further depending on the agreement you make by publishing to Journal: Inventions then it could become property of the Journal: Inventions
Whereby you would loose your right the your ideals to Journal: Inventions.
And being Journal: Inventions you have to get permission from Journal: Inventions before you can use it any place else ever.

Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 09/25/2017 03:52PM by Roberts_Clif.

Quote
cwaa
........ blah, blah, blah ............ I don't want to participate, but I feel others should know that having a peer reviewed article doesn't really have much value.

And publishing any kind of stupidity has even less. As I said before, tell me of a better way than peer review and I may listen

Mike

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 09/25/2017 01:39PM by leadinglights.

Quote
Roberts_Clif
Am I correct, If you put the information out like this, It becomes public knowledge.
And it Cannot be copyrighted or Patented being public knowledge.

And further if the agreement you make by publishing to Journal: Inventions then it could become property of the Journal: Inventions
Whereby you would loose your right the your ideals to Journal: Inventions.
And being Journal: Inventions you have to get permission from Journal: Inventions before you can use it any place else ever.

It is copyrighted by the writer even without the formalities the moment you publish it unless formally transfered. Patentability varies but we in the RepRap community should welcome anything that screws up patentability and inventions never become the property of the journal.

Mike

Quote
cwaa
Peer reviews are a silly idea and was only started 40 years ago.

Having done some academic stuff about 40 years ago, I call BS on this. Can you give a reference please? FYI, Wikipedia says "WA prototype professional peer-review process was recommended in the Ethics of the Physician written by Ishāq ibn ʻAlī al-Ruhāwī (854–931). "

I'd go so far as to say that this kind of thing is the reason we need peer review.