1/5

I submitted my first signed review this week - which I was still conflicted on because it was less positive than hoped when I first read through.

I know some ppl (e.g. @fraser_lab @AlexisRohou ) share invited reviews on @bioarxiv. The question for me is timing.

2/5

In this particular case, I actually turned out to be the most positive of the referees. I.e. the manuscript was rejected. While I understand the motivation to share reviews publicly, couldn't this also bias reviewers opinion at the next journal this manuscript goes to??

3/5

Is it as simple as sharing my review at some delayed point in time? Does this help or hinder the community as a whole? How do you balance concerns about "science" vs. concerns about "scientists"?

4/5

As a scientist, I want to ensure collective progress, which I think requires #openaccess and transparency. As a human, I don't want to inadvertently impede another humans individual progress.

5/5

I wish it was as simple as: "The science was faulty, that's fine to talk about it."

But there's more nuance to it than that...isn't there?