I am very sorry, but « everyone concerned at Elsevier from the top to the
bottom and the bottom to the top » doesn’t seem to understand what research on
a virus is about.
In order to be innovative and creative, researchers working on a specific virus
need of course access to all the existing
Dear Dietrich,
In the nowadays full fledged Internet era, circulation is ensured by web search
engines, particularly with the younger generation.
Publisher-based circulation (of digital articles) is linked directly to
branding.
As long as branding remains the criterium of choice for research
I am sure Elsevier, Wiley, Springer and the like are having great fun seeing
membres of the Open Access community rip each other apart:
1) those who have always tried to promote a healthy and moral alternative to
what has become of the scholarly publication process in the 4 or 5 last decades;
Éric,
Perfect response. I couldn't agree more.
In addition, there is a difference between Jeffrey's and Jean-Claude's
exhortations: one proposes to ban journals (hence articles) on the basis of a
risk of poor quality and the other suggests to ban journals (hence articles) on
the basis of access
When I want to drive on a public road, whether it is closed or temporarily
closed makes no difference to me. It is not open. I can't use it.
Embargo is antinomic to open.
Bernard Rentier
Le 1 juin 2015 à 18:26, Stevan Harnad amscifo...@gmail.com a écrit :
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 10:16 AM,
Eric,
What is the significance of 0.8% (83/10,429) ?
What useful metrics can you draw from that ?
Why would Springer deserve a kudo ? Just for transparency?
What's new if it becomes clear that double-dipping means taking underfunded
academic institutions for a ride ?
Greetings,
Bernard
I do not believe they are asking for anything contradictory.
We all agree on (1), but when (2) is asking (some) librarians to get out of the
way, it means just that they should not interfere with the process of self
archiving on the basis of such considerations as scientific quality or any kind
Le 21 sept. 2014 à 07:51, Jean-Claude Guédon
jean.claude.gue...@umontreal.ca a écrit :
Finally, given that all universities require, an annual assessment of
performance, including a bibliography of publications in the completed year,
would it be difficult to compare the repository's
Il agree, Richard, but we are not really looking for accuracy here, we are
looking for a general trend. The method is approximative and, as Jean-Claude
mentions rightfully, it suffers a terrible language and domain bias. In other
words, it is plagued by a strong underestimation.
Whether ORBi's
Liège does not mandate anything, so far as I know; it only looks into the
local repository (Orbi) to see what is in it, and it does so to assess
performance or respond to requests for promotions or grant submissions. (JC.
Guédon)
Oh no, Jean-Claude, Liège mandates everything.
It is a real
WOW !
And we did praise that man...!
Terrible...
Le 9 déc. 2013 à 16:12, Stevan Harnad amscifo...@gmail.com a écrit :
Beall, Jeffrey (2013) The Open-Access Movement is Not Really about Open
Access. TripleC Communication, Capitalism Critique Journal. 11(2): 589-597
Dear Bjoern, Eric and Heather,
I fully agree that it is good practice to duplicate deposits. Actually, there
is nothing wrong with that.
And on these lines, I would recommend public repositories. I feel much less at
ease with private ones.
We have had terrible experiences with commercial
Indeed Heather, in Belgium, we are now achieving total compatibility between
universities IRs as well as with the FRS-FNRS (the major Research Funder).
Authors have to file in their papers only once. However, if absolutely needed,
various formattings can be provided by the software.
I should
Libraries are definitely places where awareness occurs. They are the sentinels.
However, they don't have enough power (generally) to impose Open Access as a
permanent reflex with researchers.
The only way researchers can be convinced is through mandatory pressure from
the funders and/or the
Elsevier's policy is now clear:
Accepted author manuscripts (AAM): Immediate posting and dissemination of AAM’s
is allowed to personal websites, to institutional repositories, or to arXiv.
However, if your institution has an open access policy or mandate that requires
you to post, Elsevier
Alma,
There is a mistake on the link. It should read:
http://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/lords-select/science-and-technology-committee/news/open-access/
Cheers,
Bernard
Le 12 janv. 2013 à 10:11, Alma Swan a.s...@talk21.com a écrit :
Alma, could you provide the source
I wouldn't want to let Stevan look like he stands alone here.
I am terrified by such statements as those made here by Mr. Belenkiy (whom, by
the way, I do not know).
These statements are not only peremptory, but they take us back 15 years in the
dark ages of the nascent OA era.
I admire
Le 13 juil. 2012 à 09:32, Peter Murray-Rust pm...@cam.ac.uk a écrit :
What is the percentage of full-text ACS papers pubished by Liege which are
visible at time of publication?
None, of course!
Just ask for an e-print when you are in thé ORBi web site and we'll send it at
once. It's Green,
Sorry, but I disagree with this.
I understand all the help that celebrities can bring to a cause, but the choice
of the celebrity should be wise. In this case, there is a dangerous risk of
mixing up concepts.
Wikipedia is, by definition, the negation of peer reviewing. Or, at best, it is
Dear Thierry,
In the French speaking community of Belgium (also called the Wallonia-Brussels
Federation), the most advanced IR policy is that of Liege University. The
others, mainly at Brussels and Louvain, are moving ahead and should be fully
mandated by 2013, this is the reason why the
It is my pleasure to announce that the Board of Administrators of the FRS-FNRS
(Fund for Scientific Research in French-speaking Belgium) has officially
decided to use exclusively Institutional Repositories as sources of
bibliographic data in support of grant or fellowship submission (except for
21 matches
Mail list logo
