PhDP/article_preprint — pull request #32 by ethanwhite (2013-02-26 21:39:51+00:00)
Title: Conclusion softening

In the process of going over the ms doing minor cleanup I reread the conclusions section and am somewhat concerned that it is not as beneficial to the preprint cause as it could be. I want to apologize up front for bringing this up so late. I feel quite badly that I wasn't paying close enough attention to bring this up earlier and I understand if folks feel this limits our ability (or your willingness) to make any changes. That said, I have never met an editor who wasn't open to some polishing and tone balancing towards the end of the process (and in fact I've often been encouraged to do this sort of work at this stage in the game).

My concern is that the Conclusions come across as presenting preprints as almost a replacement for journals in a lot of ways and thus presents some of our collectively more radical perspectives on things. Whether or not we see the world this way I don't think that it will play well with the broader audience of academics who are heavily invested in the current system. Therefore, I have attempted to bring the Conclusions more in line with what I feel is the tone of the rest of the ms. I think this ends on a positive note that is difficult to argue with and therefore provides the greatest potential to influence the use of preprints in biology, both by encouraging authors to do so and by presenting them to publishers as not too great a threat.

Again, my apologies for bringing this up so late. I understand if this precludes its inclusion.