[GOAL] GOAL Digest, Vol 67, Issue 27

[Dr D.A. Kingsley]

Point taken Jean-Claude, this correspondence is happening while I am on
the move! If we get on to actually running this project the questions will
be crafted with considerably more care than a quick email relying on my
memory from a year ago.

Danny

Dr Danny Kingsley
Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
Cambridge University LibraryWest Road, CB3 9DR
e: dak45 at cam.ac.uk
p: 01223 747 437
m: 07711 500 564t: @dannykay68
w: www.osc.cam.ac.uk
b: https://unlocking research.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk
o: orcid.org/0000-0002-3636-5939







On 22/06/17 16:51, "goal-bounces at eprints.org on behalf of
goal-request at eprints.org" <goal-bounces at eprints.org on behalf of
goal-request at eprints.org> wrote:

>Send GOAL mailing list submissions to
>	goal at eprints.org
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>	http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>	goal-request at eprints.org
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
>	goal-owner at eprints.org
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of GOAL digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: Embargoes, evidence and all that jazz (Gu?don Jean-Claude)
>   2. Re: Embargoes, evidence and all that jazz (David Prosser)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 13:03:07 +0000
>From: Gu?don Jean-Claude <jean.claude.guedon at umontreal.ca>
>Subject: Re: [GOAL] Embargoes, evidence and all that jazz
>To: "Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)" <goal at eprints.org>
>Message-ID:
>	<6B1F081806A79B4DA42B7CE6438AC8817AA88F31 at asphodel-cour.sim.umontreal.ca>
>	
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>Point 3 is quite funny: only negative experiences?
>
>How about neutral and positive experiences?
>
>I love the framing of well-crafted, objective, and unbiased questions. In
>my classes, point three would bring an F to his/her author. :-)
>
>Jean-Claude Gu?don
>________________________________________
>De : goal-bounces at eprints.org [goal-bounces at eprints.org] de la part de Dr
>D.A. Kingsley [dak45 at cam.ac.uk]
>Envoy? : jeudi 22 juin 2017 06:07
>? : goal at eprints.org
>Objet : Re: [GOAL] Embargoes, evidence and all that jazz
>
>Dear all,
>
>Picking this question back up. Yes at OSI in 2016 the Embargoes group did
>pull together a plan for some research.
>
>Our workgroup?s presentation is here -
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMy03Thyz64
>
>
>The write-up is here:
>http://osinitiative.org/osi-reports/osi2016-reports/report-from-the-embarg
>o
>-workgroup/
>
>Basically the proposed research was in three phases:
>
>1. A survey to determine the impacts of embargoes on scholarly
>communication
>2. A literature review to determine the origins and rationales for
>embargoes
>3. An analysis of some case studies where publishers have changed their
>embargoes and have had negative consequences
>
>Given I have a fairly busy day job I have not had a huge amount of time to
>devote to this. However, something that would move the project along
>immeasurably is the provision of actual data from publishers. Gemma has
>mentioned a few (three) potential examples that could feed into this
>discussion and it would be excellent if we could see some data to try and
>see if there are trends here.
>
>This is a call out to any other publishers who can provide some data on
>this issue.
>
>As it happens Gemma and I are attending the same conference - OAI10
>Innovations in Scholarly Communication -
>https://indico.cern.ch/event/405949/ (hashtag #OAI10 if interested) and
>have had a quick discussion on this.
>
>We agreed that this conversation has been going around in circles for some
>time and it would be really helpful if we could move forward with some
>real examples and real data. I certainly would very much welcome this!
>
>Regards,
>
>Danny
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>On 21 Jun 2017, at 18:58, Hersh, Gemma (ELS-CAM)
>><g.hersh at elsevier.com<mailto:g.hersh at elsevier.com>> wrote:
>>
>>Hi Danny
>>
>>I agree it would be helpful if we all had (additional) evidence all
>>parties felt confident in. I had thought this was something you were
>>leading on through OSI. Is that correct? If so, perhaps you could provide
>>an update.
>>
>>Kind regards
>>Gemma
>>
>>
>
>
>Dr Danny Kingsley
>Head, Office of Scholarly Communication
>Cambridge University LibraryWest Road, CB3 9DR
>e: dak45 at cam.ac.uk
>p: 01223 747 437
>m: 07711 500 564t: @dannykay68
>w: www.osc.cam.ac.uk
>b: https://unlocking research.blog.lib.cam.ac.uk
>o: orcid.org/0000-0002-3636-5939
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>GOAL mailing list
>GOAL at eprints.org
>http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
>
>
>
>************************************