Dear Lucie, You are right. I should have sent that message off-list.
Apologies to Nicolas, Stevan > On Aug 14, 2015, at 1:33 PM, Lucie Burgess <[email protected]> > wrote: > > 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" <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> >>> 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 - [email protected] >>> Open@work - Une Société libre utilise des outils libres >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> GOAL mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> GOAL mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal > > > _______________________________________________ > GOAL mailing list > [email protected] > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal _______________________________________________ GOAL mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
