If we'd all stop using the verb "publish" when we really mean "endorse", much conversation on this topic would be clearer.
(Not aimed at anyone here, by the way; just a general observation :-) .) -Karl Richard Brooks <r...@acm.org> writes: >Part of the problem is the use of publications to >drive academic "retention, tenure, promotion." >Publications should be vetted by a set of peers >that only allow publication of quality goods. The >journals are supposed to be the gate-keepers and >enforcers of quality. This means that the people trying >to publish have an incentive to publish as much as >they can. > >Having the authors pay gives the supposed gatekeepers >an economic incentive to publish more and lower quality. >If costs are not paid by the subscribers (who should >in principle only pay for quality goods) then it is >hard to find a model that is going to keep the bar >high enough. > >Professional societies (IEEE, ACM, etc.) >can probably maintain quality in this scenario. >But that decreases the number of journals and the amount >of available info... > >On 04/08/2013 04:19 PM, michael gurstein wrote: >> I'm wondering whether some global equivalent of the copyright collection >> societies http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright_collective might not >> work although they would need to be updated to reflect current issues >> around CC and related licensing… Richer institutionscould pay in for >> access to Open Access journals perhaps on a pay per usage basis and >> given a relatively modest cost structure for OA journals this might be >> sufficient to cover operating costs on a Robin Hood basis for poorer and >> LDC libraries. …just a thought. >> >> >> >> M >> >> >> >> *From:*liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu >> [mailto:liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu] *On Behalf Of *LISTS >> *Sent:* Monday, April 08, 2013 10:58 AM >> *To:* liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu >> *Subject:* Re: [liberationtech] For everyone and their grad students: >> Fake, pay-to-publish journals & conferences >> >> >> >> Indeed, this would be a problem. However, it's already a problem, which >> is to say that poorer universities cannot afford subscriptions to EBSCO >> and whatnot to begin with, and thus their faculty have trouble keeping >> up with research in comparison to those at richer schools. What I'm >> suggesting here could at least alleviate this problem, because richer >> schools would subsidize /access/ to research. >> >> Moreover, I'm imagining that the cost of pay-to-publish would be far >> lower than for-profit schemes like T&F and Elsevier, thus enabling >> poorer school's libraries to save money and actually increase their >> faculty's ability to do research (assuming that's their mission). >> However, I don't have numbers on this, so I could be wrong. >> >> - Rob Gehl >> >> On 04/08/2013 11:52 AM, Glassman, Michael wrote: >> >> The problem with this is that faculty from wealthier universities will >> have much more capability to publish than faculty from less wealthy >> universities. And those who can get their work supported by those with >> money have an upper hand of getting more information out than those who do >> not have their work supported. There is already enough of this in grants >> perhaps. Maybe we could envision something like low cost subscriptions so >> that individuals or universities could pay a small fee to journals they use >> a lot. This works well on a number of political blogs. >> >> >> >> Michael >> >> ________________________________________ >> >> From: liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu >> <mailto:liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu> >> [liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu >> <mailto:liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu>] on behalf of LISTS >> [li...@robertwgehl.org <mailto:li...@robertwgehl.org>] >> >> Sent: Monday, April 08, 2013 1:45 PM >> >> To: liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu >> <mailto:liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu> >> >> Subject: Re: [liberationtech] For everyone and their grad students: >> Fake, pay-to-publish journals & conferences >> >> >> >> Or, potentially, university libraries could shift from buying >> >> subscriptions to paying for their university faculty's publication fees. >> >> If the ultimate product is an open access publication, then the issue >> >> isn't paying for access, but rather paying to produce the public good. >> >> >> >> - Rob Gehl >> >> >> >> On 04/08/2013 11:42 AM, michael gurstein wrote: >> >> Publishing may be dirt cheap but any systematic/formal e.g. academic >> >> publishing isn't free... So the problem is that while there is a >> necessary >> >> and valuable shift from commercial publishing (and outrageous >> profiteering) >> >> to open access online publishing there really aren't any good >> business >> >> models yet to cover the (much less but not totally trivial) costs of >> the new >> >> forms of academic publishing. >> >> >> >> If for whatever reason (and there are lots including the issues >> pointed to >> >> here) one doesn't want to go to a pay for play model that leaves >> >> advertising(???) or donations (???) or... >> >> >> >> M >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> >> From: liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu >> <mailto:liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu> >> >> [mailto:liberationtech-boun...@lists.stanford.edu] On Behalf Of >> Richard >> >> Brooks >> >> Sent: Monday, April 08, 2013 9:34 AM >> >> To: liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu >> <mailto:liberationtech@lists.stanford.edu> >> >> Subject: Re: [liberationtech] For everyone and their grad students: >> Fake, >> >> pay-to-publish journals & conferences >> >> >> >> It's not curious. It is accurate. As the funding model moved from >> >> subscribers paying for access to authors paying for publication, the >> >> financial incentives changed as well. The loosening of standards is >> an >> >> obvious consequence of this decision. >> >> >> >> The question of how best to publish quality academic information is >> >> non-trivial. Like the question of where to get quality current >> affairs >> >> information. It will take a while for things to adjust to the >> ability of the >> >> Internet to make publishing dirt-cheap. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> On 04/08/2013 12:19 PM, James Losey wrote: >> >> I think it's curious how this article frames the journals as >> "open >> >> access" rather than a more appropriate "pay to play" >> >> >> >> On Mon, Apr 8, 2013 at 6:05 PM, Yosem Companys >> <compa...@stanford.edu <mailto:compa...@stanford.edu> >> >> <mailto:compa...@stanford.edu> <mailto:compa...@stanford.edu>> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> From: Nathaniel Poor <natp...@gmail.com >> <mailto:natp...@gmail.com> >> >> <mailto:natp...@gmail.com> <mailto:natp...@gmail.com>> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/08/health/for-scientists-an-exploding-w >> >> orld-of-pseudo-academia.html >> >> >> >> "The scientists who were recruited to appear at a >> conference called >> >> Entomology-2013 thought they had been selected to make a >> presentation >> >> to the leading professional association of scientists who >> study >> >> insects. But they found out the hard way that they were >> wrong...." >> >> >> >> This has been a problem for a while, but now it's big >> enough to be a >> >> newspaper story. >> >> >> >> ------------------------------- >> >> Nathaniel Poor, Ph.D. >> >> http://natpoor.blogspot.com/ >> >> https://sites.google.com/site/natpoor/ >> >> -- >> >> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change >> password >> >> by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu >> <mailto:compa...@stanford.edu> >> >> <mailto:compa...@stanford.edu> >> <mailto:compa...@stanford.edu> or changing your settings at >> >> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change >> password by >> >> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu >> <mailto:compa...@stanford.edu> or changing your settings >> >> at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> =================== >> >> R. R. Brooks >> >> >> >> Associate Professor >> >> Holcombe Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Clemson >> >> University >> >> >> >> 313-C Riggs Hall >> >> PO Box 340915 >> >> Clemson, SC 29634-0915 >> >> USA >> >> >> >> Tel. 864-656-0920 >> >> Fax. 864-656-5910 >> >> email: r...@acm.org <mailto:r...@acm.org> >> >> web: http://www.clemson.edu/~rrb >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by >> >> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu >> <mailto:compa...@stanford.edu> or changing your settings at >> >> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password >> by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu >> <mailto:compa...@stanford.edu> or changing your settings at >> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by >> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu <mailto:compa...@stanford.edu> >> or changing your settings at >> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by >> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu <mailto:compa...@stanford.edu> >> or changing your settings at >> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by >> emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at >> https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech >> -- Too many emails? Unsubscribe, change to digest, or change password by emailing moderator at compa...@stanford.edu or changing your settings at https://mailman.stanford.edu/mailman/listinfo/liberationtech
