@YosephBarash Thank you and your group members for developing MAJIQ! I would love to see a Docker version of MAJIQ. I'm using a Mac Studio with M1 chips and have tried extensively to install MAJIQ2, but unfortunately, I've had no success so far.

@HiCryoEM @JDGrossLab @__caro__line___ @nchesarino @memerman @ig_ech @caleighmazumaya @yifan_ucsf How about this paper (? It seems that the proteins of the complex were expressed in E coli...

Hope it is this way. How can HHMI, WT, MPG tolerate that @eLife becoming a mediocre journal? But there are also pessimistic tweets saying that eLife is NOT going to be a "journal" anymore, it is going to be a "Platform" of papers selected with reviews on them.

@mbeisen @eLife In the new eLife mode, for my published work there, I can still put the journal name "eLife" in my CV, is this right?

@mbeisen @AMartinezArias @cshperspectives @eLife Mike, you mentioned that "instead of selecting papers", but if I understand right, eLife still "selects" papers, because the editors "select" papers, is that right?

@mbeisen @AMartinezArias @cshperspectives @eLife Mike, I worried about this, if "not high-quality papers" as you mentioned, can I understand that there are going to be a lot of low-quality papers in eLife in the near future?

@eLife eLife evolves fast, and I hope eLife keeps doing good. I can see on Twitter a lot of pessimistic views on the new eLife publication model starting at the end of January next year (2023). I wonder if eLife can self-correct if the new mode is failing?

@ribosam12 @mbeisen "make your own assessment", then it seems that there is no need for reviwers anymore and everyone judge by his/her self.

@mbeisen @eLife As eLife publication policies evolve fast, do you think that in the near future eLife is going to accept all the submitted manuscripts and just play a role in reviewing them?

@mbeisen @Chebky1 Why not block papers that are of "inadequate" quality? Although reviewers will say and explain why, is it good for the readers to read low quality papers in eLife? In addition, the recruiters/employers likely do not have time to read the eLife assessments of lots of candidates.

@mbeisen @Chebky1 I don't understand 1) why eLife still wants to publish "inadequate" quality manuscript? 2) Does eLife want to totally eliminate "impact factor" ?

Very beautiful article!

@JCellBiol @IGBIllinois @MCB_Illinois @yuchenuiuc @jmuiuc @lgchang27 Congratulation!

@chiolo_lab Congratulations!