PLoS.org

This is awesome.
P.S. The trakcbacks are always broken.

Interesting article-Looking forward to learning more about article level metrics too

That's $5 per star! haha unbelieveable

I agree Lydia! "Overzealous employee" my...foot. Thank you Dr. Tremblay, IHE, and PLoS for sharing this!

sad to see, understandable, perhaps, but sad; having you here enabled me to let non-librarian/non-scientist people with wide or unique interests know that PLoS had worthy things happening (or even exists); FB has been a great way for me to link my friends from multiple worlds to good information from another world; it will be harder to do now

I can't really blame the editor-in-chief for this; although he did the right thing by resigning. Have they launched an investigation into how this article was peer-reviewed and passed?

that Phil Davis - there are lots of bad journals - just because some of them happen to be open access says nothing

I heard about SCIgen *ages* ago - I say good on the "authors for putting in the time to make and submit the spoof. I also get incredibly spammed by Bentham just because I support open access publishing models. The point was not to diss peer review, but rather the standards of the journal in question, and that they are just using so-called open access as a cash cow vanity publishing outfit. If such places get publicly embarrassed enough, one might hope their source of money might dry up.

Creators of SCIgen use it 4 yrs ago to automatically generate a "paper" that get into computer science conference but it get into "non-reviewed" track. This one at Bentham Science Publishers get thru peer review. Shameful

Any non-facebook link?

this is a dubious comparison.

Take that Elsevier Group!