Generally a good idea to highlight this issue once in a while. A bit more research before would have been nice, but who expects nice from you :D
My projects are listed behind my witness link. Alone the full node costs thousands, not counting in the time for upkeep. Of course a lot is automated, but I still need to keep it running. Check the availability of my services, you don't get there by slacking.
And it's taking heavy load, so it's not just for fun.
Steeminvite and steemdice are used a lot, I keep trying to spread the reward pool out, and I work with several parts of the community. More things are planned, not announcing them though.
If all this is nothing is luckily up to the community who actually knows about those things to decide, not just you.
I agree with your point that PEvO doesn't move fast. That's because it doesn't get the support from the scientific community that I hoped. I paid someone full time last year who went around conferences, and while he got some nice words about how great the idea is, in the end all scientists really care for is funding for their own research. Can't blame them, but he threw the towel.
The idea stands and I'm still up to realizing it with the right people around, but I won't force a project into existence that isn't designed perfectly, I always made that clear.
@pharesim I've been voting you for witness. I'll continue to do that. Thank you for supporting the science community on Steemit.
PEvO is something I'll have to check out. And soon. It looks excellent. Was told about it by @lemouth; but I've yet to check it out.
One issue which I suspect you're running up against is that those who are tenure track are required to publish one to three papers a year in a small list of appropriate journals. The list is according to the field.
Then open access preprints will be placed on arXiv, bioRxiv, or a university homepage. Or if it's desired to publish the peer reviewed copy without a paywall, an institution will generally subsidize the 1500$ to 2000$ open access fee. Therefore many scientists have an unfortunate lack of incentive to make the switch.
I strongly agree with you that getting peer reviewed journals on a decentralized blockchain basis is the most sustainable and cost effective and transparent way to do academic publishing with peer review and handle priority in the future. Free archiving of the paper and comments. (I wrote my first Steemit post on this subject.)
The good news is that the above incentives problem applies only to those who are not financially independent or have not yet gotten tenure . . . I'll come and chat after I learn more about the project. I may have some ideas about making use cases and getting around the incentives problem in general. If the user experience you've planned is good, I'll try to get information about it placed in several journals, and see what happens.
Thank you! I'm looking forward to talk to you when you've done the research. If possible please join the discord linked on the website.
@pharesim, sorry to commandeer a little here, but did you notice @art-universe made a pretty sexy painting of you?
here's a link to the original post if you wanna go give it an upvote.
Omg no. Thank you for the notice!
@pharesim i'm new member.l have heard many of about you.you are one of helpful person in steemi.i post introduceyorself and have details me.support me in this platform.
Yep, That's why I voted for him as a witness!
I think that people are ready to change, if they have options. Options are coming. They are even there (check scipost.org).
Where PEvO could also help is with respect to the referee that no one cares about (and who worked like hell for free). I should maybe write about that, one or the other day.
I don't know what you do on steemit @pharesim. All I know is the fact that with the help of steeminvite, i've been able to get 3 people instant accounts and I'm not stopping. So I don't know where @berniesanders 's sources are.