Everybody with a reasonable education and interest is a researcher from time to time; for some it's a job; some are affiliated to an institution.
You may well be right that public access is not enough reason to induce publishing researchers to bother to make their research publications OA. That, sadly, seems to be the case. That also seems to be the case for the 'OA citation advantage', for the 'taxpayer has the right to access' argument, for the 'we're paying twice for research' argument, etcetera. These arguments should translate into a general ethical argument. When scientific or scholarly research results obtained with public resources are worthy of being published (and a lot more is worthy of being published than is being published now ? think negative results), they belong to the 'no?sphere', the knowledge sphere for all humanity to take in, when so desired. It should ? and in my judgment it will ? be socially and professionally unacceptable for any researcher who wishes to be taken seriously to keep his or her published results behind barriers. Jan Velterop On 29 Mar 2012, at 02:47, Stevan Harnad wrote: > No flames, Peter. I said researcher -- not institutionally affiliated > researcher. > > Researchers are the ones most researcher is written for: to be used, > applied and built upon. > > And I also said that health-related research was one of the special exceptions > where public access is indeed desired and needed. > > But health-related research is not representative of most scientific and > scholarly > research. > > Hence it is not reason enough to induce researchers bother to make their > research OA (or their institution bother to mandate it). > > Maximizing research access for those intended to use and build upon is. > > (And no one said anyone was a second class citizen.) > > Peace. > > On 2012-03-28, at 4:18 PM, Peter Murray-Rust wrote: > >> >> >> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 5:06 PM, Stevan Harnad <harnad at ecs.soton.ac.uk> >> wrote: >> Some comments on Richard Poynder's interview of Mike Rossner in "Open & Shut" >> http://poynder.blogspot.ca/2012/03/rups-mike-rossner-doing-whats-right.html >> >> Practically speaking, public access (i.e., free online access to research, >> for everyone) includes researcher access (free online access to research >> for researchers). >> >> Moreover, free online access to research, for everyone, includes both public >> access and researcher access. >> >> I do not wish to start a flame war on this list, but to distinguish "public" >> and researcher" is totally unacceptable to me. I have worked as a scientist >> for 15 years outside academia and I am not a second class citizen. There are >> many outside academia who are every bit as good scientists as those inside - >> they pay the taxes which pay research and pay library subscriptions. >> >> There are people who would be dead if they could not have read the medical >> literature - fortuitously because they happened to be employed by a >> university. >> >> P. >> >> -- >> Peter Murray-Rust >> Reader in Molecular Informatics >> Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry >> University of Cambridge >> CB2 1EW, UK >> +44-1223-763069 >> _______________________________________________ >> GOAL mailing list >> GOAL at eprints.org >> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > GOAL at eprints.org > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20120329/d2ed8b38/attachment.html
