Dear Stevan and all I am very engaged by the GOAL open access list and I find reading it informing, educating, stimulating, and inspiring by turn. The debate it engenders is laudable.
But I have never posted to the list. May I say I thought this comment below was a rather inappropriate way to treat someone who is new to the list and to the debate and who wishes to engage with it. Please, can we treat people with respect in responding to the comments they make, and avoid making sarcastic comments which I feel are unhelpful. The debate will be richer and hopefully better informed by having a welcoming and inclusive approach. Not everyone is as knowledgeable about the history of open access or the issues as Stevan - surely we would do better to change that by fostering a mutually supportive approach? Response such as this one below, are one of the reasons I read the list but am discouraged from posting to it. On this occasion I have been tempted out of my shell! Best wishes, Lucie Lucie Burgess Associate Director for Digital Libraries Bodleian Libraries, University of Oxford Clarendon Building, Broad Street, Oxford Senior Research Fellow, Hertford College Tel: +44 (0)1865 277104 +44 (0)7725 842619 Twitter @LucieCBurgess LinkedIn LucieCBurgess On 14/08/2015 17:28, "Stevan Harnad" <har...@ecs.soton.ac.uk> wrote: >Perhaps it¹s time for our newcomer, Nicolas Pettiaux, to stop posting for >a while and do a little reading to inform himself about OA and its (short) >history. Otherwise he is just making us recapitulate it for him. > >> On Aug 14, 2015, at 12:03 PM, Nicolas Pettiaux <nico...@pettiaux.be> >>wrote: >> >> Dear >> >> I appreciate these discussions and clarifications. For me, and for most >> people who are nex to the subjects and I meet, "Gold open access" and >> "green open access" are confusing terms, even though they have been >>used >> for a long time in official documents. >> >> Green refers to nature and gold to expensive. What else for newcomers >>(= >> most people in fact) ? >> >> And nature is not necessarily cheap, while gold is most of the time >> expensive. >> >> What is "cheap open access" ? By cheap open access, I mean the full >> price of publishing a work (most of the time online only) in such a way >> that its overal price be as low as possible and ONLY reflect the actual >> costs ? >> >> The best method I can think of is forget about ANY journals, and >> consider as "publication quality paper" a work that is published >> anywhere online, be it on an institutional (open) repository or any >> website. Stop counting papers but only refer to their quality as >> measured for example effective evaluation of a committee made of human >> beings and not anymore by any accounting technique. Yes, this would >> suppose that on a per document base, or per person base, a committee >> would have to do actual work. But this is done already for most grant >> attribution or tenure selection processes. Maybe not yet by the actual >> reading of the papers and comments about his own papers an authors >>would >> write. >> Comments on a public website where the paper is published could also be >> taken into account in the evaluation. >> >> Many people agree today to consider that the peer review system does >>not >> work anymore due to a too large number of submitted papers and a too >> large number of journals/reviews. >> >> Is there any other solution than dumping the reviews, the journals, the >> papers as they are evaluated and listed today ? I am not the one >> proposing this . I have discussed the subject with Pierre-Louis Lions, >>a >> famous French mathematician, professor at the College de France and >> president of the board of the Ecole Normale supérieure who mentioned >> such a procedure he would appreciate and support. >> >> Best regards, >> >> Nicolas >> >> -- >> Nicolas Pettiaux, phd - nico...@pettiaux.be >> Open@work - Une Société libre utilise des outils libres >> >> _______________________________________________ >> 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 _______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list GOAL@eprints.org http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
