RE: https://mastodon.social/@tuomov/116768577960200379

Let’s see how many days it takes for Set-Valued and Variational Analysis to send this 56-page behemoth back as a desk reject boomerang 🪃.

They have a 40-page limit.

No point in even trying luxury journals with 25 page limits, or worse.

(At least machine learning conferences allow massive appendices, but proofs don’t belong in appendices! They are the work!)

⬇️

It is becoming nearly impossible to get journals to stamp extensive research. Everything has to be splittable into attention-deficit TikTok-sized bites.

And this paper is actually too short. There’s still much to do.

⬇️

Scientific journals act as though they were tabloid magazines. But that is not their function. Their purpose is to evaluate novelty, assess correctness, and place their stamp on the work. Nothing more. Editorial opinions belong elsewhere. Who reads journals?!? Today, scientific publication happens on #arXiv. Discovery happens through search engines, social networks, citations, talks, and personal recommendations.

⬇️

Once journals start thinking of themselves as products competing for attention, incentives shift toward short, fashionable, easily marketable papers. Extensive, self-contained works become liabilities rather than assets.

⬇️

The academic certification system is broken because it insists on conflating itself with publication and dissemination—roles that it no longer serves. We need to move to structures that embrace living documents that evolve over time and are reviewed, revised, and extended organically through real use—not static PDFs frozen forever after a handful of perfunctory referee reports.

⬇️

Research should be treated more like open source software: continuously improved, corrected, extended, and scrutinized. But both #peerreview ers and #opensource developers could benefit from less gatekeeping and more constructive engagement with users and contributors.