The first Panton Discussion with Richard Poynder was a great success. At science online (#solo10) we made some informal contacts and as a result we shall have some more discussions in the near future. There is no fixed format – they are essentially un-discussions in that it depends who bumps into whom and who will be around the Panton Arms. We take a simple recording kit and have a room to ourselves for about 2 hours.
The topic is fluid but should centre on Open Data. It could be a guest asking questions of the OKF, or the OKF asking questions of a person or organization where Open data is an important topic (they don’t necessarily have to be early adopters).
Tomorrow 2010-09-09:12:00 we’ll be meeting with David Dobbs (“Contributor, Atlantic Monthly, New York Times Magazine, Scientific American, Slate, National Geographic, Wired, and other publications”).
As to agenda, I’m mainly hoping to listen and hear from you people about the path and obstacles to more open science publication routes, much along the lines discussed at Science Online, and about what to you seem the best efforts underway to jump (or dismantle from below) the biggest obstacles.
[…]
Finally, a key question seems to be whether and how to replace the main functions of current model of peer review — that is, establishment of integrity of method at minimum, a la PLOS, and perhaps a minimal integrity of conclusions from findings at a broader scale. Which parts are most vital to preserve or replace, and which aspects if any are unnecessary?
This will again be useful for us to organize our thoughts. We’ll try not to cover the ground we went over with Richard.
Anyone is welcome to drop in. Assuming the series is successful we’ll be appealing for transcribers.
The ground rules are that the discussions are informal, destined for release under CC-BY and so re-usable in articles, editorials, etc without permission but with acknowledgement.
We have 1 definite engagement next week, another promised soon and another likely.