On 2 May 2012, at 15:31, Stevan Harnad wrote: > On 2012-05-02, at 9:28 AM, Jan Velterop wrote: > >> On 2 May 2012, at 13:32, Stevan Harnad wrote: >>> >>> Andrew is so right (and the current UK government is showing as much good >>> sense in turning to JW as they showed for many years in turning to RM). >>> >>> Wikipedia is based on the antithesis of peer review. Asking JW to help make >>> sure peer-reviewed research is available to all is like asking McDonalds to >>> help the WHO/FDA make sure that wholesome food is available to all. >> >> Ach, come off it, Stevan. By your reckoning arXiv is also the antithesis of >> peer review. Would you talk in the same way about Paul Ginsparg? > > Arxiv contains preprints of articles before and after peer review. Arxiv > does not do peer review. Neither do institutional repositories.
And Wikipedia doesn't either, so why is that the antithesis to peer review? > > (Why do you ask about Paul Ginsparg?) > >> OA will gain from more involvement of people who understand diplomacy, >> persuasion, and yes, 'marketing'. > > At the moment, Jimmy Wales does not have a clue about what are the real > problems of getting OA provided by researchers; nor does he have a clear > understanding of (or any experience with) peer review. He knows and understands far more about OA that you presume (on the basis of what do you presume that, actually?). For a start, he has been 'educated' on all matters OA by Melissa Hagemann herself. > > This can all be remedied, if someone has JW's ear, and he listens and > understands. > > Then JW can be a helpful (though no doubt expensive Expensive? No-doubt? You didn't read the article in The Guardian, did you? There it says "⦠he was brought in by No 10 as an unpaid adviser to government on crowdsourcingâ¦". > ) conduit to the ears of > those (David Willetts?) who are in a position to do what needs to get done to > make the RCUK mandates work. > > Meanwhile, regarding diplomacy and persuasion, I suggest that you give > more weight to what Professor Rentier has posted > about academia's attitude to Wikipedia. We are trying to win researchers > over to providing OA to their peer-reviewed research -- not to win them > over to some fantasied Wikipedia-style alternative to peer review. > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/2012-May/000372.html > > We've been down this path so many times, Jan. Is the appointment of a > celebrity name now to be the occasion for rehearsing it all yet again? I know somebody who is infinitely more repetitive with his views than I am with my views. > > It's not diplomacy that's needed; it's effectively formulated and implemented > policy. The RCUK already leads the rest of the world in OA, but its OA policy > needs tweaking to make it effective. > > Stevan Harnad > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > GOAL@eprints.org > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal _______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
