Has anyone here published with @plosclimate?
My manuscript is slowly approaching submission state. It is a very technical paper about the essence of my #PhD: quantifying natural #CO2 emissions at the #Starzach site (Turns out, it's a few tonnes per day! 🤯)
Reading through the existing #PLOSClimate papers, mine seems a little too mathematical, but I guess it's fine? Typically one would submit this to AMT or JTECH but PLOS is a nonprofit, which I want to support.
The current academic publishing system is a terrible mess of quasi-monopolys, ridiculious publishing costs, #PhD's suffering from #publishOrPerish pressure, godawful paywalls, unpaid reviewers, authors waiving rights on their own work, and more...
#PLOS being a nonprofit brings some fresh air into this: They have no interest in accepting only sensational results - just good old peer review.
It seems the academic world thus seems (?) to see #PLOS papers as "lesser quality", because also negative or non-results are allowed.
I never was into any of these reading or citing metrics, #OpenAccess is my top priority. I am funded by public money, so I'd find it unaccptable if my publications were paywalled. None of them have many reads or citations, though... Too niche a subject I guess. 🤷
So I think we should publish good stuff to journals like #PLOS and boost their reputation. 🚀
Oh and #PLOS has a #TeXLaTeX template, which is a hard requirement for me. Journals not accepting LaTeX in physics fields is just silly. #PLOS's template is a bit funny though. No provided class, and you're supposed to submit it self-contained by manually pasting-in the auto-generated bibliography and included files, etc and weirdly excluding figures. I wrote a tool that does this automatically:
Yann Büchau 