I really like the PeerJ initiative for some reason, and while I have not yet published anything there myself, they seem to become more and more attractive as a venue. Recently they got indexed by PubMed (as well as other scientific indexing services), and also they now let undergraduates publish for free (assuming that they have a "normal" senior co-author publishing with them).
Now look at this beautiful little paper:
https://peerj.com/articles/64/
...and realize that practically there's no excuse in having orphan data anymore. Anything that was done properly should be published, even if it's negative data, or the project was abandoned, or it does not tell a story, or whatever.
And a bonus: some nice infographics, also from PeerJ =) Evolution of de-facto grammar standards for the names of some famous diseases:
Now look at this beautiful little paper:
https://peerj.com/articles/64/
...and realize that practically there's no excuse in having orphan data anymore. Anything that was done properly should be published, even if it's negative data, or the project was abandoned, or it does not tell a story, or whatever.
And a bonus: some nice infographics, also from PeerJ =) Evolution of de-facto grammar standards for the names of some famous diseases:
(source: https://peerj.com/articles/67/)
