Why OMXUS Publishing Exists
Traditional publishing works like this: you write something, you submit it to a journal or a publisher, and someone with credentials decides if the world gets to see it.
That someone went to the right school. Knows the right people. Sits on the right boards. The criteria for what gets published has almost nothing to do with whether it's true and almost everything to do with whether the author fits the profile.
The result is that most of the world's knowledge is locked behind paywalls, filtered through gatekeepers, and formatted for an audience of other gatekeepers. The people the research is about — the ones living it — never see it.
We think the credential should be the evidence.
If your work has referents — peer-reviewed sources, verifiable data, reproducible findings, or the reader's own experience — it belongs in the conversation. Your postcode, your accent, your university (or lack of one) are irrelevant.
The Rules
1. Evidence is the credential. No CV required. If your claims have referents, you can publish.
2. Free to read. Always. No paywall. No subscription. No "institutional access."
3. Free to publish. No submission fee. The $2,000 APC that journals charge is a class filter pretending to be quality control.
4. Multiple formats. Every publication should serve every brain. Reading, listening, watching, doing, visualising, storytelling, data.
5. Community review. Real people, real names, real accountability. The vouch system applied to knowledge.
6. Include yourself in the critique. Giles swings the lens to himself. Applebee does it via proxy. Harari forgets himself. We don't publish Harari.
Who This Is For
The researcher whose findings threatened a funder. The nurse who documented patterns no one wanted to see. The teacher who knows the curriculum is broken. The kid from Belcourt who needs one teacher to say: "you belong here."
Camus couldn't afford university. A teacher saved him. This is the teacher at scale.
Not selling. Serving. If you think of a better way, let's do it.