Grace LindsayNov 12, 2022

This, from PNAS reviewing instructions, is actually pretty good:

"The purpose of peer review is not to demonstrate proficiency in identifying flaws."

Show threadLorenzo De Carli
@Neurograce this is a good point but, at the same time, checking that a work does not have major flaws is one of the purposes of reviewing. I struggle a lot with this - how to be positive without ignoring major structural
problems.
Nov 12, 2022 at 4:14amWeb
Show threadMatthew W. ThomasNov 12, 2022
@ldklinux @Neurograce I think the point is that you should review the paper, but not in a *performative* way.
Show threadLorenzo De CarliNov 12, 2022
@mwt @Neurograce I agree, I just think that the line between “domain expert writing a thorough review” and “performative sniping” is kinda fuzzy. Although, of course, I have seen egregious examples of the latter.
Show threadGrace LindsayNov 12, 2022
@ldklinux @mwt I liked it because I feel like it was indicating that it's not about *you* as the reviewer. You're not being graded on if you caught all the flaws. Certainly discuss the flaws, but only as it is helpful in bettering the work.