Who are you?
Total number: 20 present
What does publishing mean to you? 
The current scientific publishing system is broken. Why?
"The opposite of 'open' isn't 'closed'.  The opposite of 'open' is 'broken'." –John Wilbanks  
What can we do to make it better?

ACTIVITY: what do you like in science publishing? What is broken for you?

Are we talking publications or all communications? In the past, we were more certain. Now it is less certain. Yet we're using print to express ideas, when we have many other technologies. What about publishing data? tools? The incentives don't work for this right now.
Problem of not being taken seriously unless you publish in certain journals.
OPEN vs BROKEN brainstorming ideas: What are the good things related to open science and preprints? What does make the system broken?
Open:
Broken:

DISCUSSION: What do you want to see in publishing? How to change it?

Understand what is going on, the economics of it.
Political not technical.
Start a revolution - boycott specific journals, preprint everything, review the preprints. But who will do this?
Preprints are a quiet revolution, more accessible to the scientific community than boycotting journals bottom up change.
Fear of preprinting due to journals not accepting it. See Sherpa/Romeo for a list of preprint policies by journal.
Fear of preprinting due to scooping - other researchers do my research and publish it before me. But we already share our research at conferences, sometimes it happens but it's rare. Plus some journals have "scoop protection" - see  your preprint as priority.
How difficult is it to get feedback and reviews from people who are not your colleagues? Only 11% preprints on bioRxiv have comments, some might get feedback by email. Are preprints lost in the ether?