orting-scene/why-ncaa-athletes-shouldnt-
be-paid).
Steve
From: ECOLOG <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU> on behalf of David Duffy
<ddu...@hawaii.edu>
Reply-To: David Duffy <ddu...@hawaii.edu>
Date: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 at 1:02 PM
To: ECOLOG <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU>
S
ica: grants, jobs, news" <
> ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU> on behalf of Steve Young <sl...@cornell.edu>
> Reply-To: Steve Young <sl...@cornell.edu>
> Date: Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 7:57 AM
> To: "ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU" <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.
etes
>>>
>>>(http://www.newyorker.com/news/sporting-scene/why-ncaa-athletes-shouldnt-
>>>be-paid).
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>>>
>>> From: ECOLOG <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU> on behalf of David Duffy
>>> <ddu...@hawaii.ed
In regard to publishing, I do not agree with you, I agree with Sir
Peter Medawar.
Medawar won the Nobel Prize in Medicine and the Copley Medal.
The papers are the end-point of research.
IF you have not published it as some form of a communication (e.g.
Journals, proceedings, books, govt docs,
.EDU<mailto:ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU>>
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] let's go corporate, publishing companies have!
The problem is not whether or not we are being paid. We are paid by our home
institutions. The problem is the cost of getting to publications based on
research funded
D.EDU<mailto:ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU>"
<ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU<mailto:ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU>>
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] let's go corporate, publishing companies have!
And then there is the argument that some just enjoy reviewing papers – pro bono
or payment is not something they c
; Steve
>>
>>
>> From: ECOLOG <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU> on behalf of David Duffy
>> <ddu...@hawaii.edu>
>> Reply-To: David Duffy <ddu...@hawaii.edu>
>> Date: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 at 1:02 PM
>> To: ECOLOG <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD
Just two tangential points on this topic that I've been mulling about and
bouncing off my local colleagues.
1. First, the papers we produce are not our research, they are but
advertisements of our research. We all know very highly cited papers whose
underlying quality of data may not match the
t;
Reply-To: David Duffy <ddu...@hawaii.edu<mailto:ddu...@hawaii.edu>>
Date: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 at 1:02 PM
To: ECOLOG <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU<mailto:ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU>>
Subject: [ECOLOG-L] let's go corporate, publishing companies have!
http://chronicl
Some journals, such as the open access UC Journal Collabra are doing just
that, where a portion of publication fees are set aside for authors and
they can either use that money to compensate themselves ($/review done) or
donate it to a fund to offset those publication fees for other authors with
http://chronicle.com/article/Want-to-Change-Academic/134546?cid=trend_right_h
"So why not try this: If academic work is to be commodified and turned into
a source of profit for shareholders and for the 1 percent of the publishing
world, then we should give up our archaic notions of unpaid craft
11 matches
Mail list logo
