Back to prompts
The endorsement part has the same dead-end here as with arXive and other journals. I have 4 scrolls that all work together, yet I am stuck at 1 upload, because of the endorsement requirement. As a plumber (of sorts) who studied the manuscripts that John Crapper gifted earth upon his visit, I find JAIGP a phenomenal opportunity for us plumbers (of sorts), but the endorsements are as much a hindrance here as they are on the journals that brought us here in the first place.
Alos, Sir Hidalgo, browsing upon your comment below, may I also suggest that plumbers (of sorts) can afford a submission fee per scroll, or a donation as a courtesy. Great interest in JAIPG can also be derived by increasing the public participation of everyone on social platforms like X and Bookface, it is not as if current journals on those platforms do not have an audience, and even on the most miserable of ideas ever conjectured by Accademia itself. Stick to high quality content and JAIGP will drive itself like a fission reactor. I have a viable scroll for that too that begs for public participation (https://zenodo.org/records/19080087), but I can not submit here, because of a lack of endorsements.
In fact, if you place just that scroll upon social media and make it a public participation project with milestones and thorough reviews you will find a great audience since the need to participate in great ideas is embedded in human nature itself. Learn from Edward Bernays, abuse this nature to its fullest extent.
0 net
5
Comments (5)
C
Cesar Hidalgo
· Mar 24
I understand your frustration, but I think we need to walk the thin line between a place where anything can be posted, and a place where people are willing to stand behind their work and see them through a pipeline that puts them up to scrutiny. How about this. If you get the first of your drafts al...
I understand your frustration, but I think we need to walk the thin line between a place where anything can be posted, and a place where people are willing to stand behind their work and see them through a pipeline that puts them up to scrutiny. How about this. If you get the first of your drafts all the way past AI review, then you can submit a second one. I can make that change. For the endorsement, the idea is that you should be able to find someone that is willing to vouch that your work is eligible for review. Science is the creation of knowledge in a social context. So it is an important step. No matter where you publish (an oped at a good newspaper or an article at a journal, all will require being vetted by others).
+1
K
Kobie Janse van Rensburg
· Mar 24
I agree fully on the screening process. With AI you are going to get thousands of fudged scrolls, Grok is notorious for fabricating formulations convincingly just to keep the user in a state of happiness. My main scroll is based on 3 others though, the one needs the other, so all four needs to be su...
I agree fully on the screening process. With AI you are going to get thousands of fudged scrolls, Grok is notorious for fabricating formulations convincingly just to keep the user in a state of happiness. My main scroll is based on 3 others though, the one needs the other, so all four needs to be submitted in order to remain coherent. The AI review, from what I can see, is already effective in reviewing scrolls, so yes, if one can move the criteria one step back, that will solve the combination problem. I risk vetting of the main scroll because it cites the 3 other scrolls. The 3 other scrolls can stand by themselves, but not the main one. If I had to endorse the paper of others here, I will rely on AI to do so as is.
C
Cesar Hidalgo
· Mar 24
Maybe, you could try submitting all of them as one longer manuscript? Usually publications (papers or opinion pieces) are built to stand on their own. They can reference other work, but do not require people to have read it.
+1
K
Kobie Janse van Rensburg
· Mar 24
Enter is send I see :-). So let me just add the last part here. I think, because JAIGP is open for everyone, it should maintain a very high standard that can not be questioned. Already a lot of the work published on "reputable" journals like arXive are indistinguishable from myth and fantasy, so kee...
Enter is send I see :-). So let me just add the last part here. I think, because JAIGP is open for everyone, it should maintain a very high standard that can not be questioned. Already a lot of the work published on "reputable" journals like arXive are indistinguishable from myth and fantasy, so keeping things strict here is very important. I will feel much more comfortable knowing my work had to endure a rigorous process. JAIGP's reputation must compliment the credibility of anyone whose work it reviewed.
K
Kobie Janse van Rensburg
· Mar 24
"Maybe, you could try submitting all of them as one longer manuscript?" I have already started that process, but it is not that easy. It is much easier writing a recipe for Yoghurt separate from writing the process of milking the cows that provides the milk for the yoghurt too. If you get the milkin...
"Maybe, you could try submitting all of them as one longer manuscript?" I have already started that process, but it is not that easy. It is much easier writing a recipe for Yoghurt separate from writing the process of milking the cows that provides the milk for the yoghurt too. If you get the milking process wrong, the yoghurt process will also be perceived wrong, even if it is not.