On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Reckling, Falk, Dr. <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:Falk.Reckling@fwf.ac.at" target="_blank">Falk.Reckling@fwf.ac.at</a>></span> wrote:<div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
I fully agree with Peter [Murray-Rust]:<br>
a) (Europe) PMC is an enormous success, with more than 2.5 million peer reviewed papers publically available.<br>
b) This forum should be not a battlefield for a religious war discriminating in believers and heretics, but a forum of exchanging ideas ...<br></blockquote><div><br></div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Helvetica;border-spacing:0px"><div class="AppleOriginalContents">
Why is the verbatim re-quoting (by Fred Friend, and then by me) -- from a published newspaper article by Paul Jump in THE, referring to remarks by RCUK's Mark Thorley, about EPMC -- being described as "a battlefield for a religious war discriminating in believers and heretics, [not] a forum of exchanging ideas"?</div>
<div class="AppleOriginalContents"><br></div></span></div><blockquote style="margin:0 0 0 40px;border:none;padding:0px"><div class="gmail_quote"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Helvetica;border-spacing:0px"><div class="AppleOriginalContents">
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-family:Calibri"><b>“</b><i>Admitting that RCUK was "thinking about" mandatory repository deposit, Mr Thorley said that one idea was to expand the <u>Europe (formerly UK) PubMed Central repository, which currently covers only biomedicine</u>, to encompass all subjects to help publishers automate deposits</i><b>.</b>” <a href="http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=421352&c=1">Mark Thorley of RCUK</a> quoted in an article by Paul Jump in “Times Higher Education” of 4 October 2012 [<u>emphasis added</u>].</span></div>
</span></div></blockquote><div class="gmail_quote"><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse:separate;font-family:Helvetica;border-spacing:0px"><div class="AppleOriginalContents"><font class="Apple-style-span" face="Calibri"><b><br>
</b></font></div><div class="AppleOriginalContents"><div class="AppleOriginalContents">And what is religious about stating explicitly the practical advantages of institutional deposit and harvesting to EPMC over direct deposit in EPMC?</div>
<div class="AppleOriginalContents"><br></div></div></span><div><span style="font-family:Helvetica">And why are substantive ideas not responded to, substantively?</span></div><div><span style="font-family:Helvetica"><br></span></div>
<div><span style="font-family:Helvetica">Stevan Harnad</span></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<br>
<br>
<br>
Best Falk<br>
<br>
__________________________________________________<br>
Falk Reckling, PhD<br>
Social Science and Humanities / Strategic Analysis / Open Access<br>
Head of Units<br>
Austrian Science Fund (FWF)<br>
Sensengasse 1<br>
A-1090 Vienna<br>
<br></blockquote><div><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Von: <a href="mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org">goal-bounces@eprints.org</a> [<a href="mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org">goal-bounces@eprints.org</a>]" im Auftrag von "Peter Murray-Rust [<a href="mailto:pm286@cam.ac.uk">pm286@cam.ac.uk</a>]<br>
Gesendet: Montag, 08. Oktober 2012 19:27<br>
An: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci)<br>
Betreff: [GOAL] Re: Europe PubMed as a home for all RCUK research outputs?<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On Mon, Oct 8, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Stevan Harnad <<a href="mailto:amsciforum@gmail.com">amsciforum@gmail.com</a><mailto:<a href="mailto:amsciforum@gmail.com">amsciforum@gmail.com</a>>> wrote:<br>
<br>
(2) Europe (formerly UK) PubMed Central (EPMC) is an OA collection of European biomedical articles.<br>
<br>
This is seriously incorrect and misleading. UKPMC contains essentially all of the content and many of the facilities of PubMedCentral and covers closed access as well as open Access (however the term is defined). It also has global content, not just European.<br>
<br>
I am on the advisory and project board of UKPMC. I have have copied colleagues and suggested that they give a formal statement (as it it more authoritative than posting from me).<br>
<br>
I will note that I am a strong supporter of domain repositories such as UKPMC and see them as entirely appropriate for the deposition of manuscripts. They are set up to do so and have a service for conversion of manuscripts. UKPMC has a wide range of search and integration facilities which are completely lacking in the fragmented institutional repository infrastructure. For example it is possible to link manuscripts to species, diseases and much more.<br>
<br>
"Open Access" is a complex subject and progress depends on informed discussion which includes getting one's facts right. I would hope that the GOAL list would encourage such discussion, including contributions from those who propose methods other than Green for OA. Having been the focus of several (unjustified) ad hominem attacks on this list I shall not raise the temperature unless it is clear that there can be a fair hearing. I recently sat through an hour lecture by SH whose subtitle was "What Peter Murray-Rust thinks and why he is wrong". The thoughts attributed to me were factually incorrect.<br>
<br>
--<br>
Peter Murray-Rust<br>
Reader in Molecular Informatics<br>
Unilever Centre, Dep. Of Chemistry<br>
University of Cambridge<br>
CB2 1EW, UK<br>
<a href="tel:%2B44-1223-763069" value="+441223763069">+44-1223-763069</a><br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
GOAL mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:GOAL@eprints.org">GOAL@eprints.org</a><br>
<a href="http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal" target="_blank">http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>