[GOAL] Re: libre vs open - general language issues

[Jean-Claude Guédon]

Patience, Stevan. Patience, please...

jc
-- 

Jean-Claude Guédon
Professeur titulaire
Littérature comparée
Université de Montréal



Le vendredi 14 août 2015 à 12:28 -0400, Stevan Harnad a écrit :

> Perhaps it’s time for our newcomer, Nicolas Pettiaux, to stop posting for
> a while and do a little reading to inform himself about OA and its (short)
> history. Otherwise he is just making us recapitulate it for him.
> 
> > On Aug 14, 2015, at 12:03 PM, Nicolas Pettiaux <nicolas at pettiaux.be> wrote:
> > 
> > Dear
> > 
> > I appreciate these discussions and clarifications. For me, and for most 
> > people who are nex to the subjects and I meet, "Gold open access" and 
> > "green open access" are confusing terms, even though they have been used 
> > for a long time in official documents.
> > 
> > Green refers to nature and gold to expensive. What else for newcomers (= 
> > most people in fact) ?
> > 
> > And nature is not necessarily cheap, while gold is most of the time 
> > expensive.
> > 
> > What is "cheap open access" ? By cheap open access, I mean the full 
> > price of publishing a work (most of the time online only) in such a way 
> > that its overal price be as low as possible and ONLY reflect the actual 
> > costs ?
> > 
> > The best method I can think of is forget about ANY journals, and 
> > consider as "publication quality paper" a work that is published 
> > anywhere online, be it on an institutional (open) repository or any 
> > website. Stop counting papers but only refer to their quality as 
> > measured for example effective evaluation of a committee made of human 
> > beings and not anymore by any accounting technique. Yes, this would 
> > suppose that on a per document base, or per person base, a committee 
> > would have to do actual work. But this is done already for most grant 
> > attribution or tenure selection processes. Maybe not yet by the actual 
> > reading of the papers and comments about his own papers an authors would 
> > write.
> > Comments on a public website where the paper is published could also be 
> > taken into account in the evaluation.
> > 
> > Many people agree today to consider that the peer review system does not 
> > work anymore due to a too large number of submitted papers and a too 
> > large number of journals/reviews.
> > 
> > Is there any other solution than dumping the reviews, the journals, the 
> > papers as they are evaluated and listed today ? I am not the one 
> > proposing this . I have discussed the subject with Pierre-Louis Lions, a 
> > famous French mathematician, professor at the College de France and 
> > president of the board of the Ecole Normale supérieure who mentioned 
> > such a procedure he would appreciate and support.
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > 
> > Nicolas
> > 
> > -- 
> > Nicolas Pettiaux, phd  - nicolas at pettiaux.be
> > Open at work - Une Société libre utilise des outils libres
> > 
> > _______________________________________________
> > GOAL mailing list
> > GOAL at eprints.org
> > http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GOAL mailing list
> GOAL at eprints.org
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20150814/3785bc00/attachment.html