[kriro]

The simplest workflow I can think of:

1) Publish with no review

2) Open for review

3) If review is passed, tag as reviewed and bundle all those into a special reviewed section (which can be cited)

4) Reserve the right to remove from reviewed (some later reviewer finds major flaws etc.)

You'd have to handle the dynamic nature of papers (git-like) but in essence I'm thinking of a website with "all submitted papers" and a checkbox for "reviewed papers only". I think that would be valuable and people would likely leave the checkbox on by default.

I'm also curious if the review has to be blind in this model. I think it would be more valuable if the reviewers actually signed with their names and the review feedback was open as well. Shifts the value from being in a prestigious journal to being successfully reviewed by a smart/reputable person. Ideally doing these reviews would then become reputation building as well.