On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 1:52 PM, Rick Anderson <rick.ander...@utah.edu>wrote:
> The issue that was raised (by Fred) under this subject thread was the > possibility of subscription losses dues to Green OA archiving. > > Yes. But not the possibility of subscription losses because the publisher allows Green OA archiving. (That too can be discussed here -- but only to point out the deleterious consequences of such a policy for OA, and the self-defeating basis of such a cancellation policy. > Since libraries comprise a substantial portion of journal subscribers, > then surely it's substantially relevant to discuss how libraries might make > cancellation decisions about Green OA journals. > > It is indeed. And if librarian's cancellation decisions are based on unthinking criteria that self-destruct -- namely, if a journal allows Green OA, cancel it -- it needs to be pointed out that this would be an excellent way to ensure that journals decide not to allow Green OA. And thereby slow the growth of Green OA. And thereby undermine the basis of the cancellation decision. > (Such discussion may or may not end up lending support to your favored > outcome — but is that really the filtering criterion we ought to impose on > contributions to the conversation?) > > OA is not the filtering criterion for library lists dedicated to the library's budget problems. But it is certainly the filtering criterion for the gOAl, bOAi and sparc OA lists. Stevan Harnad > > --- > Rick Anderson > Assoc. Dean for Scholarly Resources & Collections > Marriott Library, University of Utah > Desk: (801) 587-9989 > Cell: (801) 721-1687 > rick.ander...@utah.edu >
_______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
