All research objects that conform to the parameters of academy commons can be housed in or referenced by these commons on an equal basis. There are no intrinsically preferred forms, genres, or approaches.
In order to improve the breadth and pace of knowledge generation, academic commons will accept any contributed object that adheres to their guidelines. Because these commons are grounded by a logic of abundance and a goal of reuse, they do not serve as gatekeepers or pretend to know the ultimate knowledge-value of any of their objects.
This means that there is no test of value, impact, significance, relevance, or endorsement that can be used to determine what belongs within academy commons. Blog postings are as eligible as scholarly monographs. Highly cited papers are as welcome as preprints. Groundbreaking studies are as welcome as replication studies.
Once an object is in a commons, it is available for additional services. For example, commons services could be implemented to help commoners search for objects. Early versions of objects can be peer-reviewed. Objects can earn citations. Objects may be further curated or aggregated into collections by other commoners based on their expertise.
Some services will not be provided inside academy commons. For example, others in the academy may want to add metrics or rankings to objects in a commons. The commons have no objection to these services, however all forms of metrics should be built on transparent and open standards so that they may be reproduced and understood. Rankings will be made external to commons and will not be housed inside academy commons.
Adapted from Version .05 Force11 Commons Principles http://bit.ly/2r8mWPT