BestThinking.com completes two years of development with a public launch on Albert Einstein's birthday....
BestThinking is an open access website focused on transparency and collaboration where identity-verified thinkers create, search and share reliable content and expertise....As its name suggests, BestThinking is for the wide variety of topics that have no certain conclusions, only the current best thinking of the best minds available. BestThinking joins Wikipedia and Google Knol as a place for people with a passion and expertise for knowledge-based content.
BestThinking believes it can overcome the challenges of other open access websites through its dedication to transparency, and by applying the latest thinking on content rating systems and enhanced peer moderation. Transparency at BestThinking means all contributors must have their identities verified and all editing, moderation, discussion and rating are done openly and on the record....
"The BestThinking content rating system limits bias and manipulation and represents a significant advancement over the commonly used 5-star rating system. Our peer moderation system provides recourse for contributors faced with moderators acting in bad faith," said Todd Carlson, CTO. At BestThinking, a moderator's rejection of a proposed revision can be appealed to other moderators. If a consensus cannot be reached, a new linked topic can be created representing supporting, dissenting, compromise or alternative viewpoints....
Comments
I welcome new ways to combine OA with user comments or ratings. But the phrase knowledge-based content reminds me of cheese-like product. When the announcement refers to the challenges of other open access websites, it seems to mean the challenges of Wikipedia. Surpassing Wikipedia is a worthy goal, but it appears that BestThinking has a parochial understanding of "other open access websites".
BestThinking may work well and I wish it luck. Like Wikipedia itself, the most important fact about it is that users can make it excellent, and I don't want to throw a wrench into a positive feedback loop. However, I'd rather see serious thinkers submit their work to peer-reviewed journals and deposit it in OA repositories. If we want comment and ratings systems --on top of peer review, as part of peer review, or (for preprints) instead of peer review-- either to continue the inquiry or help us identify what deserves our time, then we should develop modular systems which integrate with existing OA repositories. That would give users comment-enhanced access to the primary literature, and to the whole interoperable network of that literature. It would also encourage repository deposits.
Posted by
Peter Suber at 3/14/2009 01:02:00 PM.
The open access movement:
Putting peer-reviewed scientific and scholarly literature
on the internet. Making it available free of charge and
free of most copyright and licensing restrictions.
Removing the barriers to serious research.
I recommend the OA tracking project (OATP) as the best way to stay on top of new OA developments. You can read the OATP feed on a blog-like web page or subscribe to it by RSS, email, or Twitter. You can also help build the feed by tagging new developments you encounter.
