The pandemic united us in ways we'd never experienced. It blurred the lines between silos and helped us realize shared experiences where we may have thought "disparate" was a better descriptor of roles in the publishing community. We realized that we all want best-in-class in collaboration, problem-solving, and inclusion, even though our environment sometimes makes it difficult for us to imagine seeing eye-to-eye. || Speakers: Michele Avissar-Whiting; Dominque J. Moore; Ben Mudrak; Jennifer Regala; Alexa Colella; Willa Liburd Tavernier

It is now common practice for researchers in many disciplines to post their work as a preprint ahead of or in conjunction with submission to a peer-reviewed journal. For some, the question is no longer whether to upload a preprint of their work but when or how quickly to do so. With preprints now a first step in the submission process, publishers and editors have a new set of questions: Where do preprints fit in the scope of upholding scientific rigor? What if the study or data are flawed (and potentially harmful to readers, especially those who aren’t scientists)? Who takes responsibility for the accuracy of preprints and the data now “published” and available to the public? How do we handle retracting, citing, and referencing preprints? Are preprints a “move fast and break things” example of new directions in academic publishing, or should we consider implementing some speed bumps? This panel will discuss these questions and more.