[GOAL] Re: "Let them pay or let them wait"

[Richard Poynder]

But it is not a co-conspiracy -- much as conspiratorial thinking comes in handy at lean times when there is nothing new to talk about. 

 

So although the dupees have themselves to blame for allowing themselves to be duped, that does not put them on the same plane of culpability as the dupers. After all, it is the dupers who gain from the duping, and the dupees who lose, whether or not they have themselves to blame for falling for it.

 

Blaming the victim, as Richard does, below, also has a long predigree <http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/0364.html>  in this Forum, but I will not rebut it again in detail. The short answer is that adopting effective Green OA mandates (rather than vilifying the victims for their foolishness) is the remedy for all the damage the victims have unwittingly allowed to be done them for so long.

 

And stop fussing about metrics. They too will sort themselves out completely once we have universally mandated (and provided) green OA.

 

Richard Poynder: What Jean-Claude’s criticism of large publishers like Elsevier and Wiley omits is the role that the research community has played in their rise to power, a role that it continues to play. In fact, not only has the research community been complicit [emphasis added] in the rise and rise of the publishing oligarchy that Jean-Claude so deprecates, but one could argue that it created it — i.e. this oligarchy is a creature of its own making. 

    After all, it is the research community that funds these publishers, it is the research community that submits papers to these publishers (and signs over copyright in the process), and it is the research community that continues to venerate the brands (essentially a product of the impact factor) that allow these publishers to earn the high profits that Jean-Claude decries.

    And by now seeking to flip this oligarchy’s journals to OA the research community appears to be intent on perpetuating its power (and doubtless profits).

    One might therefore want to suggest that Jean-Claude’s animus is misdirected.

 

So are Richard's reproaches.

 

Your increasingly bored archivangelist,

 

Stevan Harnad

 

 

>>> 

 

And I might be tempted to suggest that Stevan has misinterpreted what I said. But I am happy to let him have the last word (I would hate to be charged with conspiring to fuel the boredom of a bored archivangelist!)

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/pipermail/goal/attachments/20151229/b762f8b0/attachment-0001.html