Journals put evaluation and selection into a 'blackbox' relying on only 2-4 secret prepublication peer reviews.
Reviewers can pass unjustified harsh judgement or exaggerated praise due to personal competition or sympathy. The outcome is also influenced by business logic of profit maximizing private companies that charge high prices even in the age of the internet with low distribution costs.
Acceptance is subjective and may not reflect public evaluative evidence.
"Where incentive structures fail to deliver conditions that most academics believe are needed to best stimulate insights, these structures must be challenged and changed [...]."
Scientists are involved in designing an insight-oriented publishing and evaluation model.
Free Access means greater readership, more involvement and thus better quality.
PEvO sets incentives for perpetual evaluation cycles contrary to the one-time peer-review.
PEvO will be open source, allowing everyone to fork PEvO and set up a similar service with different algorithms.
More time for "real work". Gain reputation by doing science, not marketing. Reduced publishing costs. Get access to and make use of relevant literature.
Culture of creativity, communicationand transparency. Systemized, decentralized, cost-efficient data storage. No more memberships or subscriptions.
Overcome exclusivity of knowledge. Increased quality and topicality. No more price barriers or paywalls.