You're not getting many views on this question because you don't have enough topics listed. You should add journals, publications, publishing, journal publishing, etc.
I consider RG a professional network rather than a social network. In spite of that RG is not an alternative or additional venue for publications because RG does not publish anything and members do not publish on the site. RG provides a place to post documents and members upload and post documents that may or may not have been published elsewhere.
From the first days of the web the term publish has been used erroneously. :People create extremely amateur web sites and call themselves publishers. They write a few incomprehensible lines of drivel on a blog and call themselves writers. The nonsense scribbled on Facebook is not writing and publishing. People submitting an article to a recognized web publication with an editorial process of approval and revision may call themselves writers with published articles. Otherwise, it's nothing more than uploading, posting to the web.
Before appearing in print or on the web as an acceptable publication, the publishing process requires the involvement of experts (reviewers, referees) in the discipline of the manuscript to check for validity, accuracy, etc. and editors in the area of language to check for spelling, grammar, etc. RG offers none of this and can't be expected to considering the huge number of people it would require.
What RG could do, however, is provide a mechanism where members could mark a manuscript as "unpublished" as well as a place to check "list on 'manuscripts available for publication' page," and the existing "reviews requested" feature. RG could aggregate such items on a page labeled "Publishers" divided into "books" and "journals". Upvotes and reviews would appear on the member's profile and also on the "Publishers" listing. Eventually book and journal publishers might use this as a resource for potential publications, especially since some of the manuscripts with substantial upvotes and reviews would save the publishers time and money (the cost of paying reviewers).
RESEARCH GATE, YOU'RE SUGGESTING I BE THE FIRST TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION. I ALREADY HAVE!!!!!!! I WROTE AN EXTENSIVE, EXHAUSTIVE, THOROUGH, COGENT, REASONED, LOGICAL, AND INFORMATIVE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION. AMONG OTHER POINTS OF IMPORTANCE, I EXPLAINED THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PUBLISHING AND SIMPLY POSTING ON THE WEB.
WHERE IS MY ANSWER? LOST IN THE BOWELS OF YOUR SERVERS, NO DOUBT.
BUT I CAN'T COMPLAIN MUCH. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME OF MANY ANSWERS THAT THIS HAS HAPPENED.
Oops! There's my answer. Where's it been for the past hour? "Hmm, since there's an hour between the first (original) post and the second one and since answers generally appear instantly, and, further, since RG is mentioned several times in the original missive, I deduce that the only logical explanation is that RG held it for perusal to ascertain that their good name is not sullied, hence causing a slight delay in the posting (not publishing) of the first answer." "Jolly good, Sherlock. I think you've solved another one."
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Microbiology
- Scientific Research