I am gonna probably get pushback, but here it goes.
I don't get the concept of negative/bad reviews.
A negative, bad, aggressive review is just a poorly written review. Turning a paper review into a personal attack is just pitiful. What’s the point? We should be in this line of work to advance science and knowledge, not tear each other to bits.

This may be unpopular but here it goes. I am seeing a whole lot of places and people from disparate, unrelated fields with no relevant expertise trying to put together COVID-related proposals.
I don't think this is a good way forward. Is it frustrating to be stuck home while this unfolds? Sure. You feel like it is your civic duty to try to help and make a difference? Sure. (SO STAY HOME, that's how you can make a huge impact).
Are we all afraid we may run out of money and close labs for good? Possible.

Attending this interesting seminar on NIH high-risk, high-reward research program. Will try to pass along as much info as possible
1/n Really nice talk from Dr. Basavappa. First up the Pioneer Award. While open to all career stages, awards typically go to more experienced folks - so be mindful of that if you decide to apply

So. @PracheeAC @BembenekLab and I wrote a feature article on @Elife!
It’s about killing two birds with one stone. A thread.
elifesciences.org/articles/38532 Early career researchers (ECR) rarely get formally trained in peer review practices, so that for many, the first contact with the formal peer review process happens when they submit their first paper