Hi, after Boghossian and Lyndsay and Pluckrose's fake Grievance Studies papers being published after long peer reviews, I was wondering about the actual peer review process itself.
Who gets to do this task, is there a pool of qualified reviewers? Are they paid, or is it career enhancing, or they do it pro bono?
Are they anonymous or named? Is the system open to abuse?
Will the folk who reviewed hoax papers positively be ridiculed, or sympathised with?
How can the system be valid if such hoaxes can get through and win awards, or is this only a problem in the more surreal backwaters of social science?
Anyway, a penny for your thoughts, good or bad, especially if you've been involved in the whole process. Jerry from England.