It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
What do you mean by peer-review? Certainly you can have a journal, I doubt you would find it to gain any credibility in academic circles, if that's what you're after. Biohacking by its very nature is something done outside of the dominant institutions.
Still, I think peer reviewing would benefit this community. Credibility to non-biohacking academic circles would be nice, but having a peer reviewed journal would be beneficial to us as well. The Biohack forum is nice but it isn't very official and nothing is peer reviewed. There's no guarantee what you're reading is valid. This could be a step in the right direction.
I like this idea. An underground online open source journal where you can publish protocols and results and have them critically evaluated. Even if none of the reviewers are phD scientists, it still increases the quality of DIY biohacking through peer review.
Like @trroyyc said, increased credibility in academic circles would be nice, but wouldn't need to be the main focus. The main focus would be increasing the quality of Biohacking literature and resources out there. I would love to be able to cite a peer reviewed protocol on magnetic implants in a DIY paper or write a paper about producing insulin via E.coli bioreactors and have it critically reviewed by peers in biohacking circles.
PM me if you move forward with this, I'd be interested in getting involved.