On 22 September 2012 20:24, David Gerard dger...@gmail.com wrote:
It's such a pity that Elsevier's attempt to legally block open access
requirements [1] means that they must be destroyed utterly with not
Of course, it's not all happy bunnies and rainbows and unicorns on the
OA side. There's
Ten years ago we actually tried to create an online scholarly journal
(for profit) process with rapid publication.Unfortunately there was no
interest from investors as the dot com bust had left them shy on
anything online...
eventualism and our reliable sources model are probably a very poor
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 12:08 AM, emijrp emi...@gmail.com wrote:
Coordinating people to write encyclopedias was expensive. Well, until 2001.
I'll have a tshirt with this.
Aubrey
___
Wikimedia-l mailing list
Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org
2012/9/26 Andrea Zanni zanni.andre...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 12:08 AM, emijrp emi...@gmail.com wrote:
Coordinating people to write encyclopedias was expensive. Well, until 2001.
I'll have a tshirt with this.
Mee too, mee too.
Cristian
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 3:08 PM, emijrp emi...@gmail.com wrote:
Coordinating people to write encyclopedias was expensive. Well, until 2001.
eventualism and our reliable sources model are probably a very poor
match to time-sensitive original research in the sciences or
engineering, which is what
Cristian Consonni, 27/09/2012 00:40:
2012/9/26 Andrea Zanni zanni.andre...@gmail.com:
On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 12:08 AM, emijrp emi...@gmail.com wrote:
Coordinating people to write encyclopedias was expensive. Well, until 2001.
I'll have a tshirt with this.
Mee too, mee too.
-
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 6:31 PM, Risker risker...@gmail.com wrote:
On 24 September 2012 21:20, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 3:33 AM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
It's funny, most organizations point to our community as am example of
how
On 25 September 2012 16:24, Richard Symonds
richard.symo...@wikimedia.org.uk wrote:
To be fair, organising academics is probably quite like herding cats. I can
see it being expensive (but not quite as expensive as currently!) I wonder:
would it be possible to make it so that in order to
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Mark delir...@hackish.org wrote:
On 9/25/12 12:32 AM, George Herbert wrote:
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 2:52 PM, Richard Farmbrough
rich...@farmbrough.co.uk wrote:
On 24/09/2012 03:49, Risker wrote:
the costs of peer review
I have academics complaining to me
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 2:52 PM, Richard Farmbrough
rich...@farmbrough.co.uk wrote:
On 24/09/2012 03:49, Risker wrote:
the costs of peer review
I have academics complaining to me that they don't get paid for peer review,
so I'm not sure what these costs are.
Someone has to edit the
It's funny, most organizations point to our community as am example of how
to manage such things with volunteers.
Another example: law reviews offer an excellent and widely reproduced model
where the most esteemed publications are run by students.
On Sep 24, 2012 6:33 PM, George Herbert
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 3:33 AM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
It's funny, most organizations point to our community as am example of how
to manage such things with volunteers.
Another example: law reviews offer an excellent and widely reproduced model
where the most esteemed
On 24 September 2012 21:20, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonav...@gmail.comwrote:
On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 3:33 AM, Samuel Klein meta...@gmail.com wrote:
It's funny, most organizations point to our community as am example of
how
to manage such things with volunteers.
Another example: law
On 23/09/12 05:24, David Gerard wrote:
It's such a pity that Elsevier's attempt to legally block open access
requirements [1] means that they must be destroyed utterly with not
one stone left upon another and the ground salted. I'm crying real[2]
tears here.
On 23 September 2012 22:24, Tim Starling tstarl...@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 23/09/12 05:24, David Gerard wrote:
It's such a pity that Elsevier's attempt to legally block open access
requirements [1] means that they must be destroyed utterly with not
one stone left upon another and the
It's such a pity that Elsevier's attempt to legally block open access
requirements [1] means that they must be destroyed utterly with not
one stone left upon another and the ground salted. I'm crying real[2]
tears here.
16 matches
Mail list logo
