Sci Blogging By Following Nature Pub Rules: My Blog Is an 'Archive'

I'm following accepted archival publication "rules", non-commercial use, pre-publishing and internet sharing guidelines on this site. (See Elsevier's web publishing guide). My intent is also to comply with the Nature Pub Group "embargo" rules for blogging and pre-pub sharing to archival sites (see below). As many are probably aware, there are a number of archival sites, like arXiv.org where one can find pre-publications of articles. The intent of that sharing on an archive, as I understand it, is to give non-commercial availability and non-formalized peer-review.

 

Notice regarding blog 'copy' here:

The article(s)/ work, was originally published in a blog published by

Matthew Kosak, and the attached copy is provided by Matthew Kosak for the

author’s benefit and for the benefit of the author’s institution/blog, and is for

non-commercial research and educational use including without

limitation use in instruction at your institution, sending it to specific

colleagues that you know, and providing a copy to your institution’s

administrator.

All other uses, reproduction and distribution, including without

limitation commercial reprints, selling or licensing copies or access,

or posting on open internet sites, such as personal or institution’s

website or repository, are prohibited. For exceptions, permission

may be sought for such use through contacting the author.

 

 

Also see the following relevant guidelines for pre-publication policies on archival sites and especially scientific blogging:

 

¨       "When blogs make sense" discusses the use of the archival arXiv.org
 site http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7302/full/466008a.html

 

¨       "It's good to blog" Nature 457, 1058 (26 February 2009) | doi:10.1038/4571058a; Published online 25 February 2009

 

¨       "More researchers should engage with the blogosphere, including authors of papers in press." http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v457/n7233/full/4571058a.html

The following appears on the Nature.com site under "Editorial Rules" http://www.nature.com/authors/policies/embargo.html

What should be most "eye catching" are the Nature Publishing Group rules of pre-publication (see below)
I am  posting these on my blog specifically, as I am making every effort to comply with these rules of pre-publication.

"Material submitted to Nature/ Nature journals must not be discussed with the media, except in the case of accepted contributions, which can be discussed with the media only once the publication date has been confirmed and no more than a week before the publication date under our embargo conditions…
…The benefits of peer review as a means of giving journalists confidence in new work published in journals are self-evident. Premature release to the media denies journalists that confidence. It also removes journalists' ability to obtain informed reactions about the work from independent researchers in the field.
For all these reasons, Nature journals have refused to publish papers prematurely released to the media. Journalists who break our embargoes have been removed from the press-release circulation list, and we shall continue to use this sanction when appropriate.

 

Some relevant links on pre-publication for scientific blogs (from the NPG site):

 

• “Nature Methods: Deja vu? (what constitutes prepublication and how to avoid it). “..Our policy is also to allow posting of data on recognized preprint servers before submission. Although these servers are more common in the physics and mathematics communities, some established preprint servers such as arXiv, have biological categories. Preprint servers can be considered as 'online meetings', where content is posted for immediate discussion and feedback among a wider audience..”

• Nature: It's good to blog 
• Nature Geoscience: Embargoes on the web"