This is a Korean to English translation of a post by @signalandnoise
I. Introduction
Lots of writings are posted here in Steem. Sometimes I question myself if all these are really valuable. Especially when I read my own postings... I feel they are so awful. Just to cool myself down, I have thought about "What is valuable posting?". Let's imagine Einstein posted The Special Theory of Relativity here at Steem and the posting was actively debated in its thread. How much do you estimate for the posting? And how much for the blockchain that contains those kind of postings and debates? I came up with an idea that Steem could replace the academic paper publishing platform.
II. Bad System Model
These days academic publishing industry became problematic. Professors and graduate students submit their papers to obtain performance reviews or degrees. Editors(who don't get paid for this) ask industry experts(who don't get paid for this) to review the paper. Sometimes bad reviewers steal some ideas from the given paper and write new paper, while postponing completion of the review. This is painful for the original writer, yet there is nothing he or she can do. After several reviews, the editor become convinced that the article meet certain standard, it will be published. However, the copyright is transferred to the journal publisher. Anyone who wants to read it have to pay higher price than general books, which goes to the publisher instead of the original writer.
III. Proposed Scheme
Please read this out. "Want to Change Academic Publishing? Just Say No"
Reading through, what you may have been taking as for granted about scholar will turn out to be absurd.
So why not try this: If academic work is to be commodified and turned into a source of profit for shareholders and for the 1 percent of the publishing world, then we should give up our archaic notions of unpaid craft labor and insist on professional compensation for our expertise, just as doctors, lawyers, and accountants do.
To me, "Just Use Steem" sounds better than "Just Say No". Of course, there are development works to be done, effort to put.
Something like "scholar.steemit.com". I am just describing what I imagine.
1. The author: Submit paper.
- By posting own paper on blockchain, originality can be proved.
- Outstanding paper to be rewarded by Steem system.
- Reviewers' comments can improve original paper.
- Being published by editor, the authorship can proven.
- Whenever cited as a reference, receive 'citation count' increment accompanied by 'citation reward'
2. The Reviewer: Review paper.
- Review a paper. If approved by editor, receive 'review count' accompanied by 'review reward'
- If the paper is published, participation as a reviewer can be proven.
3. The Editor: Edit paper.
- Editor position should be filled by election. Review reward, citation reward and reputation will be considered to - win.
- Editor should measure a paper, check plagiarism and decide whether to publish or not.
- Choose reviewer comments and request author to consider accepting.
- For papers without any remarkable reviews, find reviewer from relevant expert pool.
- If the paper is published, participation as a publisher can be proven.
4. Publish
- Published articles will be exposed on main page. Then you've got a degree!
- Published articles are tagged. eg) tag: IEEE, subtag: Transactions on Information Theory
- A Journal's reputation will be measured by citation, accept ratio(published articles / submitted articles)
IV. Conclusion
This is a proposal for a Steem Web Application. I believe no one can blame on upvote begging behavior from ivory towers, since history proved this is how science and technology develop. I just want a system where the poor graduate students can be protected, motivated and focus on their research topics, instead of publishers' fat profit taking.