The OpenAccess Button Thunderclap (
https://www.thunderclap.it/en/projects/5675-open-access-button-launch )
will happen in about 5 hours from now. This comes from two students Joe and
David who are angry that paywalls still exist. The Thunderclap will push
800,000+ tweets onto the web expressing
brent...@ulg.ac.be writes
The only way researchers can be convinced is through mandatory
pressure from the funders and/or the Academic authorities. And the
only way mandates can be imposed is through the research assessment
procedures. Everything else lingers or fails.
I beg to differ.
Rentier makes some good points here. May I add that if deposit in the IR
becomes THE way to report to the tenure and promotion committee and funding
agencies, this could actually save researchers a lot of time? Currently we do
need to report our publications, often to multiple venues with
On Monday, November 18, 2013, 6:52:04 AM, you wrote:
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.
You are perfectly correct: this needs to
Stevan, Bernard:
My main concern is not with mandates, but with the repositories themselves.
If memory serves me right, there was at least one unsuccessful attempt to
defund the NIH-run Pubmed repository. ArXiv also had an existential crisis
when run from a government lab.
The weakness of
Dear Eric,
I am so completely and utterly on your page. This is precisely the way we need
to go and every library meeting I speak at confirms this view: everyone I meet
there gives me the feedback that they're ready to go for it.
Thanks for making this important point!
Bjoern
On Monday,
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
On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Bjoern Brembs b.bre...@gmail.com wrote:
Dear Eric,
I am so completely and utterly on your page. This is precisely the way we
need to go and every library meeting I speak at confirms this view:
everyone I meet there gives me the feedback that they're ready to
As a taxpayer I read the 74-page Review of progress in implementing the
recommendations of the Finch Report with interest, looking for evidence that
those who recommend policy to HM Government are making their recommendations in
a logical fashion and on the basis of available evidence. What I
As Stevan mentioned, the previous thread [GOAL] Fight Publishing Lobby's
Latest FIRST Act to Delay OA - Nth Successor to PRISM, RWA etc. is
getting a bit unwieldy. So, I am starting this new one to reply to Stevan.
I am cross-posting, because the original thread was.
Scholarly communication is a
I fully agree that library policies need to evolve. This was already my idea in
2004, when I presented my librarian's view on the necessary forthcoming changes
in libraries, at the ESOF symposium, in Stockholm.
The library's new role, new tools (for the present) for preservation, and the
need
Forwarding from Paul Royster.
I of course agree with Paul's points of criticism, but I am not quite sure
why he is directing it SPARC rather than Finch!
Perhaps Heather Joseph or Alma Swan can reply on behalf of SPARC.
I don't think SPARC rejects the post-BOAI distinction between Gratis OA
On 2013-11-18, at 7:06 PM, LIBLICENSE liblice...@gmail.com wrote:
From: Colin Steele colin.ste...@anu.edu.au
Date: Sun, 17 Nov 2013 22:25:23 +
Stevan perhaps doesn't realise that the horse has bolted over the
alleged hurdles in some parts of the world. Open access monographs are
14 matches
Mail list logo
