Open review, not peer review, for the Institute's own process

README.md

@@ -5,7 +5,7 @@ colorFrom: indigo
 colorTo: gray
 sdk: static
 pinned: true
-short_description: Open peer review for independent researchers. No APCs.
+short_description: Open review for independent researchers. No APCs.
 ---
 
 <p align="center">
@@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ short_description: Open peer review for independent researchers. No APCs.
 
 ## Why this exists
 
-A peer-reviewed paper from this lab was desk-rejected by a large commercial publisher's flagship journal on a 94% plagiarism flag — entirely from **self-overlap with the author's own prior open-access papers** on the same research program. Iterative thinking, properly cited, dressed up as misconduct by a content-matching tool and rubber-stamped by an editor who didn't read past the score.
+A paper from this lab was desk-rejected by a large commercial publisher's flagship journal on a 94% plagiarism flag — entirely from **self-overlap with the author's own prior open-access papers** on the same research program. Iterative thinking, properly cited, dressed up as misconduct by a content-matching tool and rubber-stamped by an editor who didn't read past the score.
 
 That is not peer review. That is liability-management automation wearing the costume of peer review.
 
@@ -110,7 +110,7 @@ Affiliation does **not** include review or curation rights — those are earned
 
 ## Support the work
 
-ICSAC runs on bootstrap funding from [**3Rivers WebTech**](https://3riverswebtech.com) and direct contributions from people who think rigorous, accessible peer review is worth keeping alive outside the gatekept circuit. **No grants, no university overhead, no APCs — so the math has to come from somewhere.**
+ICSAC runs on bootstrap funding from [**3Rivers WebTech**](https://3riverswebtech.com) and direct contributions from people who think rigorous, accessible open review is worth keeping alive outside the gatekept circuit. **No grants, no university overhead, no APCs — so the math has to come from somewhere.**
 
 <p align="center">
   <a href="https://icsacinstitute.org/community/donate">

index.html

@@ -4,7 +4,7 @@
 	<meta charset="utf-8" />
 	<meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1" />
 	<title>ICSAC — Institute for Complexity Science and Advanced Computing</title>
-	<meta name="description" content="Open peer review for independent researchers. Free to submit, no APCs. Accepted work published annually in Persistence (paperback + ebook)." />
+	<meta name="description" content="Open review for independent researchers. Free to submit, no APCs. Accepted work published annually in Persistence (paperback + ebook)." />
 	<style>
 		.icsac-card{
 			--ink:#14161a; --ink-soft:#4a4f57; --rule:#d8dadd; --rule-soft:#ececef;
@@ -133,7 +133,7 @@
 
 		<h1>Institute for Complexity Science<br/>&amp; Advanced Computing</h1>
 		<p class="tagline">
-			Open peer review for independent researchers. <strong style="color:var(--ink);">Free to submit. No APCs. Ever.</strong>
+			Open review for independent researchers. <strong style="color:var(--ink);">Free to submit. No APCs. Ever.</strong>
 			Accepted work runs in our annual print &amp; ebook journal, <em>Persistence</em>.
 		</p>
 		<p class="meta"><a href="https://icsacinstitute.org">icsacinstitute.org</a></p>
@@ -146,7 +146,7 @@
 
 		<h2>Why this exists</h2>
 		<div class="case">
-			<p>A peer-reviewed paper from this lab was desk-rejected by a large commercial publisher&rsquo;s flagship journal on a 94% plagiarism flag &mdash; <strong>entirely from self-overlap with the author&rsquo;s own prior open-access papers</strong> on the same research program. Iterative thinking, properly cited, dressed up as misconduct by a content-matching tool and rubber-stamped by an editor who didn&rsquo;t read past the score.</p>
+			<p>A paper from this lab was desk-rejected by a large commercial publisher&rsquo;s flagship journal on a 94% plagiarism flag &mdash; <strong>entirely from self-overlap with the author&rsquo;s own prior open-access papers</strong> on the same research program. Iterative thinking, properly cited, dressed up as misconduct by a content-matching tool and rubber-stamped by an editor who didn&rsquo;t read past the score.</p>
 			<p><em>That is not peer review. That is liability-management automation wearing the costume of peer review.</em></p>
 		</div>
 		<p class="lede" style="margin-top:14px;">
@@ -209,7 +209,7 @@
 
 		<h2>Support the work</h2>
 		<p class="lede">
-			ICSAC runs on direct contributions from people who think rigorous, accessible peer review is worth keeping alive outside the gatekept circuit.
+			ICSAC runs on direct contributions from people who think rigorous, accessible open review is worth keeping alive outside the gatekept circuit.
 			<strong>No grants, no university overhead, no APCs &mdash; so the math has to come from somewhere.</strong>
 		</p>
 		<div class="cta-row">