<div dir="ltr">Greetings white paper contributors,<div><br></div><div>You will find me in the contributor list so I do get a vote.</div><div><br></div><div>Unless people change their vote, it will be a minority vote, yet I have to do it all the same as a backup plan.</div><div><br></div><div>I doubt the group can reach consensus within reasonable time on the modified manuscript - therefore I vote to send the manuscript to another journal as per consensus previously achieved.</div><div><br></div><div>I looked at several of the options provided and here is my analysis:</div><div><ul><li>Bioinformatics cas a $190 charge per excess page - this means it will cost a lot to submit there so I will not vote for it</li><li>Royal Society Interface as 8000 word limit for review papers - which I think we qualify, and I did not see charges, so it is a good fit - if we remove table and look only at the article we are about 8000 words - so this may fit. However, I did not see a method to query the editor before submission - one has to go through their submission system if I understand correctly. It is much easier when one can ask the editor for a fit before submission. </li><li>BMJ encourages to contact the editor sna their reference style is close to how our references are formatted. So it may be a good choice, However the publication fee seems to be high 3,500 Euro.</li><li>F1000research is open - the processing charge would be $1350 for our article - yet their style is relatively easy to satisfy with references - so it may be worth the costs<br></li><li>Nature - I was thinking of technical reports - this has a fee of $1,500 if I recall correctly from a previous interaction I had with them. I know they have the option of inquiry before processing the paper, so it may be a good choice to check. There is also the option of another Nature Journal that I did not check. I think someone names Nature in our first meeting when we spoke about the venue, so it was important for me to revisit this.</li></ul><div>I could have checked more, yet from those tests I figured the most practical choice would be Royal Society Interface. Because it is already supported somewhat and formatting towards it may not take too much time. It may not be the ideal choice, yet I think it is more practical than the ones I checked.</div></div><div><br></div><div>So my vote is:</div><div>6. Journal of The Royal Society Interface<br></div><div><br></div><div></div><div><br></div><div>My reasoning is that the journal is free and doesn't seem to require too much formatting before submission. I hope we can find a way to check with the editors before submission. Yet I have no experience with this journal so if anyone corrects me on the journals I checked I may change my vote. </div><div><br></div><div>The runner up was Nature since it is each to check and since I think it was originally named - name recognition may be worth the fee.
F1000research was the third runner up - is new and innovative and not very restrictive of format - so if we are bound to pay - might as well pay for the future. <br></div><div><br></div><div>Again, my vote is intended as a fall back position to allow moving forward in case of failure to agree on revised paper. Hopefully it will not be necessary.</div><div><br></div><div> Jacob</div><div><br></div><div><br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, May 2, 2021 at 6:48 PM James Osborne <<a href="mailto:jmosborne@unimelb.edu.au">jmosborne@unimelb.edu.au</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">Agree with revision however a lot of the reviewers issues are on consistency and formatting so there need's to be some solid rules in place for how to revise. <div><br></div><div>I suggest using leading venue as the template and having a small subgroup responsible for formatting and editing to be consistent (shouldn't fall on one person to do this as it will take time). </div><div><br></div><div>While I agree that there is substantial material here it suffers from being overly long and feels like a document written by a lot of people. This makes it hard to read and this good stuff gets lost! If we want people to read it it should be easy to read.</div><div><br></div><div>I don't have access to OA funds at present but for what it's worth I support the current leading venues (Bioinformatics and RS interface).</div><div><br></div><div>James <br><div> </div><div>James </div></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sun, May 2, 2021 at 8:51 AM Jacob Barhak <<a href="mailto:jacob.barhak@gmail.com" target="_blank">jacob.barhak@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div style="color:rgb(0,0,0);font-size:12px;text-align:left;font-family:Helvetica,Arial,sans-serif">
<strong>
<table style="width:100%;float:left" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="color:red"><b>External email: </b>Please exercise caution</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
</strong><br>
</div>
<hr>
</div>
Thanks to all those who voted.
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Voting will continue so this is not final, yet since many seem to vote for revision, all those who wanted to revise should start preparing revisions. It is one thing to make a decision, it is quite another to invest the effort and actually contribute revisions
- you can ask permission to edit the document with your google account - .I will grant those - yet I will not open it to anonymous contributions. If the revision option is eventually elected we will have 2 weeks of revisions and then an approval round of 1
week to reach consensus - meaning everyone must approve again . All contributors that wanted to get in will be able to contribute. I only ask that new contributors add substantial content - like address some of our open issues. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>If we do not reach consensus within 4 weeks which is 1 week till voting end + 2 weeks of revisions + 1 week of approval, the fall back position is the current version that already achieved consensus. And consensus here means unanimous agreement among all
contributors - this is required legally for publication. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In other words if we do not reach consensus within a month on a revised version, we will resubmit the already approved version since we already reached consensus there. And I suggest not to wait till the last minute - if all revisions come in the last
day - consensus may not be reached. People need time to look at the document. So please post your revisions as soon as possible. I am using those time scales since this is the month of May already - almost 1/3 of a year since we started - and much of it was
wasted on waiting for people to react - I personally see this as dragging feet. The content we assembled is already substantial - any delay reduced the impact. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>When revising, please consider the venue. Currently it is either RS Interface or Bioinformatics yet this may change if others vote in a different direction - remember, you can change your vote and your last vote counts. </div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Hopefully this email gives everyone sufficient time to react if indeed revision will be elected.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> Jacob</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 4:56 PM Yaling Liu <<a href="mailto:yal310@lehigh.edu" target="_blank">yal310@lehigh.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
<div dir="ltr">13 - open for revision; Bioinformatics sounds good.<br>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Yaling</div>
</div>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div dir="ltr" class="gmail_attr">On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 3:45 PM William Waites <<a href="mailto:wwaites@ieee.org" target="_blank">wwaites@ieee.org</a>> wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">
Agree on 13 revision, though I am severely time-constrained for the next few weeks.<br>
<br>
No strong preference on venue but it’s good to have an idea of the audience we’re writing for. I like RS Interface or Bioinformatics. If this gets done before my MRC funding runs out, they will pay OA fees.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
-w<br>
<br>
<br>
> On 1 May 2021, at 20:38, Eric Forgoston <<a href="mailto:eric.forgoston@montclair.edu" target="_blank">eric.forgoston@montclair.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
> <br>
> 13 - open for revision; no preference on venue.<br>
> ---------------------<br>
> Dr. Eric Forgoston<br>
> Professor of Applied Mathematics<br>
> Chair, Department of Applied Mathematics and Statistics<br>
> Montclair State University<br>
> Montclair, NJ 07043 USA<br>
> +1 973 655-7242 <br>
> <a href="https://eric-forgoston.github.io/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://eric-forgoston.github.io/</a><br>
> <br>
> <br>
> On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 1:32 PM Jonathan Karr <<a href="mailto:jonrkarr@gmail.com" target="_blank">jonrkarr@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> #13 -- revise<br>
> <br>
> On Sat, May 1, 2021 at 1:18 PM Jacob Barhak <<a href="mailto:jacob.barhak@gmail.com" target="_blank">jacob.barhak@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
> Greetings white paper contributors,<br>
> <br>
> It is time to vote again for the target venue. Here are the options again. <br>
> • Cureus - resubmission after addressing editor comments<br>
> • Nature - if you vote for this venue please specify flavour such as Nature Scientific Reports<br>
> • Science<br>
> • Briefings in Bioinformatics<br>
> • Trends in Biotechnology - requires distilling the paper<br>
> • Journal of The Royal Society Interface<br>
> • Annual Review of Public Health<br>
> • BMJ<br>
> • Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering<br>
> • F1000research - if you vote for this this venue please specify Gateway / Collection
<br>
> • bulletin of mathematical biology<br>
> • Bioinformatics.<br>
> • Do not submit now - instead open for revisions for 2 weeks and then submit. If you choose this option also vote for the target venue after revisions so that we will not have to delay further.
<br>
> <br>
> I will ask that contributors pick one journal from that list - I ask that you REPLY ALL so votes will be transparent and time of vote will be registered since first to vote will break ties.<br>
> <br>
> The voting period will be until Tuesday 11-May 1am CDT <br>
> <br>
> Again, if a journal costs for open publication, whoever voted, will split publication costs. If anyone on this list is funded for this, please vote.
<br>
> <br>
> I urge contributors to vote - just so that we will have a preference order to follow in case of rejection.<br>
> <br>
> Looking forward to your votes. <br>
> <br>
> Jacob<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Vp-integration-subgroup mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Vp-integration-subgroup@lists.simtk.org" target="_blank">Vp-integration-subgroup@lists.simtk.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vp-integration-subgroup" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">
https://lists.simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vp-integration-subgroup</a><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> Vp-integration-subgroup mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:Vp-integration-subgroup@lists.simtk.org" target="_blank">Vp-integration-subgroup@lists.simtk.org</a><br>
> <a href="https://lists.simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vp-integration-subgroup" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">
https://lists.simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vp-integration-subgroup</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Vp-integration-subgroup mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Vp-integration-subgroup@lists.simtk.org" target="_blank">Vp-integration-subgroup@lists.simtk.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vp-integration-subgroup" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vp-integration-subgroup</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br clear="all">
<div><br>
</div>
-- <br>
<div dir="ltr">
<div dir="ltr">-- ------------------
<div>Yaling Liu, Professor </div>
<div>Department of Mechanical Engineering and Mechanics </div>
<div>Department of Bioengineering </div>
<div>Lehigh University </div>
<div><a href="http://www.lehigh.edu/~yal310" target="_blank">www.lehigh.edu/~yal310</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br>
Vp-reproduce-subgroup mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Vp-reproduce-subgroup@lists.simtk.org" target="_blank">Vp-reproduce-subgroup@lists.simtk.org</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vp-reproduce-subgroup" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vp-reproduce-subgroup</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div>