PubPeer

I strongly disagree with the practice of using a fictitious name on PubPeer, particularly when it is associated with an author who comments on scientific articles. This behavior is cowardly and should not be encouraged. Instead, it is important to promote the use of official university or organizational email addresses, along with the full name and affiliation of the researcher, to ensure transparency and accountability.

The idea of open discussion of published studies is good, but the comments need to be peer-reviewed and describe the concerns in a scientific manner. Further, there is no reason to use pseudonyms. If the plan is to question data or interpretation, it should be done openly.

This is really valuable project, huge respect for the people behind it. The usability of the extension could of course be better, like all of the internet. This is an open source project and people interested about the transparency of the science can contribute by donating the project money or their expertise.