<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div>zeroPPPR leads to an immediate immense saving of human effort and cost - the removal of the arbitrary authoring torture-chambers created by publishers. This has the following benefits:<br>
<br></div>* authors can choose the means of authoring that their community converges on. The crystallographers (and I am proud to be involved) have created the best scientific authoring system (CIF) for data-rich science. The community uses it. Download Knuth created the best document authoring system LaTeX 30 years ago. TimBl created HTML - a brilliant, simple flexible tool. Why do we not use these? Because the publishers can be bothered to change their arcane, archaic systems. At least 1 billion USD of data is destroyed in the publication process in chemistry alone.<br>
<br></div>* authoring would be faster. No retyping for different journals<br><br></div>* authoring would be higher quality. There could be an intermediate market for organizations and companies who helped authors created better documents if they wanted to pay. Markup languages, etc. would flourish<br>
<br></div>* the higher quality (e.g. HTML5) leads to better ways of presenting the material. Why do people have to turn their heads through 90 deg simply to read a landscape table. It could be i-n-t-e-r-a-c-t-i-v-e (there's a thought!)<br>
<br>* Gosh, we might even have versions (like Github)<br><div><br></div><div><br></div><div>The saving of time, the better quality will rapidly add up to saved billions both upstream and downstream of the publication event. New publication-consuming industries would arise. But see how strongly publishers resist the re-use of information - lobbying against content-mining and spraying CC-ND around. <br>
<br></div><div>... it was all a dream.<br></div><div> <br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 3:30 PM, Sally Morris <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:sally@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk" target="_blank">sally@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><u></u>
<div style="WORD-WRAP:break-word">
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font color="#0000ff" face="Arial">Jan, you may well be right. Certainly we will have to
give up some of what we hold dear (pun not intended!) in the old system,
if scholarly communication to cope in future. The losses may be
even more drastic - who knows?</font></span></div><div class="im">
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font color="#0000ff" face="Arial"></font></span> </div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span><font color="#0000ff" face="Arial">Sally</font></span></div>
<div> </div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial">Sally Morris</font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial">South House, The Street, Clapham,
Worthing, West Sussex, UK BN13 3UU</font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial">Tel: +44 (0)1903
871286</font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial">Email:
<a href="mailto:sally@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk" target="_blank">sally@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk</a></font></div>
<div> </div><br>
</div><div dir="ltr" align="left" lang="en-us">
<hr>
<font face="Tahoma"><b>From:</b> Jan Velterop [mailto:<a href="mailto:velterop@gmail.com" target="_blank">velterop@gmail.com</a>]
<br><b>Sent:</b> 10 December 2013 14:37<div class="im"><br><b>To:</b> Global Open Access List
(Successor of AmSci)<br></div><b>Cc:</b>
<a href="mailto:sally@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk" target="_blank">sally@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk</a><br><b>Subject:</b> Re: [GOAL] Re:
Pre-publication peer review (was: Jeffrey Beall Needlessly Compromises
Credibility of Beall's List)<br></font><br></div><div><div class="h5">
<div></div>Sally,
<div><br></div>
<div>May I join you in the ranks of those who risk being pilloried or branded
heretics? I think the solution is clear. We should get rid of pre-publication
peer review (PPPR) and publish results in open repositories. PPPR is the one
thing that keeps the whole publishing system standing, and expensive – in
monetary terms, but also in terms of effort expended. It may have some benefits,
but we pay very dearly for those. Where are the non-peer-reviewed articles that
have caused damage? They may have to public understanding, of course (there's a
lot of rubbish on the internet), but to scientific understanding? On the other
hand, I can point to peer-reviewed articles that clearly have done damage,
particularly to public understanding. Take the Wakefield MMR paper. Had it just
been published without peer-review, the damage would likely have been no greater
than that of any other drivel on the internet. Its peer-reviewed status,
however, gave it far more credibility than it deserved. There are more
examples.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>My assertion: pre-publication peer review is dangerous since it is too
easily used as an excuse to absolve scientists – and science journalists – from
applying sufficient professional skepticism and critical appraisal.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Doing away with PPPR will do little damage – if any at all – to science,
but removes most barriers to open access and saves the scientific community a
hell of a lot of money.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>The 'heavy lifting is that of cultural change' (crediting William Gunn for
that phrase), so I won't hold my breath.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Jan Velterop</div>
<div><br>
<div>
<div>On 10 Dec 2013, at 13:36, Sally Morris <<a href="mailto:sally@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk" target="_blank">sally@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk</a>>
wrote:</div><br>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="WORD-WRAP:break-word">
<div dir="ltr" align="left">
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US">At the risk (nay, certainty)
of being pilloried by OA conformists, let me say that – whatever ithe failings
of his article – I thank Jeffrey Beall for raising some fundamental questions
which are rarely, if ever, addressed.</span></div>
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US"></span> </div>
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US">I would put them under two
general headings:</span></div>
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US"></span> </div>
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US">1)<span>
</span>What is the objective of OA?</span></div>
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US"></span> </div>
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US">I originally understood the
objective to be to make scholarly research articles, in some form, accessible
to all those who needed to read them.<span> </span>Subsequent refinements such as
'immediately', 'published version' and 'free to reuse' may have
acquired <span>quasi</span>-religious status,
but are surely secondary to this main objective.</span></div>
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US"></span> </div>
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US">However, two other,
financial, objectives (linked to each other, but not to the above) have gained
increasing prominence.<span> </span>The first
is the alleged cost saving (or at least cost shifting).<span> </span>The second - more malicious, and
originally (but no longer) denied by OA's main proponents - is the undermining
of publishers' businesses.<span> </span>If
this were to work, we may be sure the effects would not be choosy about 'nice'
or 'nasty' publishers.</span></div>
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US"></span> </div>
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US">2)<span>
</span>Why hasn't OA been widely adopted by now?</span></div>
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US"></span> </div>
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US">If – as we have been
repetitively assured over many years – OA is self-evidently the right thing
for scholars to do, why have so few of them done so voluntarily?<span> </span>As Jeffrey Beall points out, it seems
very curious that scholars have to be forced, by mandates, to adopt a model
which is supposedly preferable to the existing one.</span></div>
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US"></span> </div>
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US">Could it be that the
monotonous rantings of the few and the tiresome debates about the fine detail
are actually confusing scholars, and may even be putting them off?<span> </span></span><span lang="EN-US">Just
asking ;-)</span></div>
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US"></span> </div>
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US">I don't disagree that the
subscription model is not going to be able to address the problems we face in
making the growing volume of research available to those who need it;
but I'm not convinced that OA (whether Green, Gold or any combination) will
either. I think the solution, if there is one, still eludes
us.</span></div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US"><span></span></span> </p>
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US"><span></span><span>M</span>erry
Christmas!</span></div>
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US"></span> </div>
<div style="MARGIN:0cm 0cm 0pt"><span lang="EN-US">Sally </span></div></div>
<div> </div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial">Sally Morris</font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial">South House, The Street, Clapham,
Worthing, West Sussex, UK BN13 3UU</font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial">Tel: +44 (0)1903
871286</font></div>
<div align="left"><font face="Arial">Email: <a href="mailto:sally@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk" target="_blank">sally@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk</a></font></div>
<div> </div><br>
<div dir="ltr" align="left" lang="en-us">
<hr>
<font face="Tahoma"><b>From:</b> <a href="mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org" target="_blank">goal-bounces@eprints.org</a> [<a href="mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org" target="_blank">mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>David Prosser<br><b>Sent:</b> 09 December 2013
22:10<br><b>To:</b> Global Open Access List (Successor of
AmSci)<br><b>Subject:</b> [GOAL] Re: Jeffrey Beall Needlessly Compromises
Credibility ofBeall's List<br></font><br></div>
<div></div>'Lackeys'? This is going beyond parody.
<div><br></div>
<div>David</div>
<div><br>
<div><span style="FONT-FAMILY:Helvetica;FONT-VARIANT:normal;WHITE-SPACE:normal;WORD-SPACING:0px;BORDER-COLLAPSE:separate;TEXT-TRANSFORM:none;FONT-WEIGHT:normal;FONT-STYLE:normal;BORDER-SPACING:0px;LETTER-SPACING:normal;LINE-HEIGHT:normal;TEXT-INDENT:0px"><span style="FONT-FAMILY:Helvetica;FONT-VARIANT:normal;WHITE-SPACE:normal;WORD-SPACING:0px;BORDER-COLLAPSE:separate;TEXT-TRANSFORM:none;FONT-WEIGHT:normal;FONT-STYLE:normal;BORDER-SPACING:0px;LETTER-SPACING:normal;LINE-HEIGHT:normal;TEXT-INDENT:0px">
<div style="WORD-WRAP:break-word"><span style="FONT-FAMILY:Helvetica;FONT-VARIANT:normal;WHITE-SPACE:normal;WORD-SPACING:0px;BORDER-COLLAPSE:separate;TEXT-TRANSFORM:none;FONT-WEIGHT:normal;FONT-STYLE:normal;BORDER-SPACING:0px;LETTER-SPACING:normal;LINE-HEIGHT:normal;TEXT-INDENT:0px">
<div style="WORD-WRAP:break-word"><span style="FONT-FAMILY:Helvetica;FONT-VARIANT:normal;WHITE-SPACE:normal;WORD-SPACING:0px;BORDER-COLLAPSE:separate;TEXT-TRANSFORM:none;FONT-WEIGHT:normal;FONT-STYLE:normal;BORDER-SPACING:0px;LETTER-SPACING:normal;LINE-HEIGHT:normal;TEXT-INDENT:0px">
<div style="WORD-WRAP:break-word"><span style="FONT-FAMILY:Helvetica;FONT-VARIANT:normal;WHITE-SPACE:normal;WORD-SPACING:0px;BORDER-COLLAPSE:separate;TEXT-TRANSFORM:none;FONT-WEIGHT:normal;FONT-STYLE:normal;BORDER-SPACING:0px;LETTER-SPACING:normal;LINE-HEIGHT:normal;TEXT-INDENT:0px">
<div style="WORD-WRAP:break-word"><span style="FONT-FAMILY:Helvetica;FONT-VARIANT:normal;WHITE-SPACE:normal;WORD-SPACING:0px;BORDER-COLLAPSE:separate;TEXT-TRANSFORM:none;FONT-WEIGHT:normal;FONT-STYLE:normal;BORDER-SPACING:0px;LETTER-SPACING:normal;LINE-HEIGHT:normal;TEXT-INDENT:0px">
<div style="WORD-WRAP:break-word"><span style="FONT-FAMILY:Helvetica;FONT-VARIANT:normal;WHITE-SPACE:normal;WORD-SPACING:0px;BORDER-COLLAPSE:separate;TEXT-TRANSFORM:none;FONT-WEIGHT:normal;FONT-STYLE:normal;BORDER-SPACING:0px;LETTER-SPACING:normal;LINE-HEIGHT:normal;TEXT-INDENT:0px">
<div style="WORD-WRAP:break-word"><span style="FONT-FAMILY:Helvetica;FONT-VARIANT:normal;WHITE-SPACE:normal;WORD-SPACING:0px;BORDER-COLLAPSE:separate;TEXT-TRANSFORM:none;FONT-WEIGHT:normal;FONT-STYLE:normal;BORDER-SPACING:0px;LETTER-SPACING:normal;LINE-HEIGHT:normal;TEXT-INDENT:0px">
<div style="WORD-WRAP:break-word"><span style="FONT-FAMILY:Helvetica;FONT-VARIANT:normal;WHITE-SPACE:normal;WORD-SPACING:0px;BORDER-COLLAPSE:separate;TEXT-TRANSFORM:none;FONT-WEIGHT:normal;FONT-STYLE:normal;BORDER-SPACING:0px;LETTER-SPACING:normal;LINE-HEIGHT:normal;TEXT-INDENT:0px">
<div style="WORD-WRAP:break-word"><span style="FONT-FAMILY:Helvetica;FONT-VARIANT:normal;WHITE-SPACE:normal;WORD-SPACING:0px;BORDER-COLLAPSE:separate;TEXT-TRANSFORM:none;FONT-WEIGHT:normal;FONT-STYLE:normal;BORDER-SPACING:0px;LETTER-SPACING:normal;LINE-HEIGHT:normal;TEXT-INDENT:0px">
<div style="WORD-WRAP:break-word"><br></div></span></div></span></div></span></div></span></div></span></div></span></div></span></div></span></div></span></span></div><br>
<div>
<div>On 9 Dec 2013, at 21:45, Beall, Jeffrey wrote:</div><br>
<blockquote type="cite"><span style="FONT-FAMILY:Helvetica;FONT-VARIANT:normal;WHITE-SPACE:normal;WORD-SPACING:0px;BORDER-COLLAPSE:separate;TEXT-TRANSFORM:none;FONT-WEIGHT:normal;FONT-STYLE:normal;BORDER-SPACING:0px;LETTER-SPACING:normal;LINE-HEIGHT:normal;TEXT-INDENT:0px">
<div link="blue" vlink="purple" lang="EN-US">
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:14pt;FONT-FAMILY:Consolas;COLOR:rgb(68,84,106)">Wouter,<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:14pt;FONT-FAMILY:Consolas;COLOR:rgb(68,84,106)"><u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:14pt;FONT-FAMILY:Consolas;COLOR:rgb(68,84,106)">Hello,
yes, I wrote the article, I stand by it, and I take responsibility for
it.<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:14pt;FONT-FAMILY:Consolas;COLOR:rgb(68,84,106)"><u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:14pt;FONT-FAMILY:Consolas;COLOR:rgb(68,84,106)">I
would ask Prof. Harnad to clarify one thing in his email below, namely this
statement,<span> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB">"OA is all an anti-capitlist plot."<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:14pt;FONT-FAMILY:Consolas;COLOR:rgb(68,84,106)">This
statement's appearance in quotation marks makes it look like I wrote it in
the article. The fact is that this statement does not appear in the article,
and I have never written such a statement.<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:14pt;FONT-FAMILY:Consolas;COLOR:rgb(68,84,106)"><u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:14pt;FONT-FAMILY:Consolas;COLOR:rgb(68,84,106)">Prof.
Harnad and his lackeys are responding just as my article
predicts.<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:14pt;FONT-FAMILY:Consolas;COLOR:rgb(68,84,106)"><u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:14pt;FONT-FAMILY:Consolas;COLOR:rgb(68,84,106)">Jeffrey
Beall<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:14pt;FONT-FAMILY:Consolas;COLOR:rgb(68,84,106)"><u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div>
<div style="BORDER-TOP:rgb(225,225,225) 1pt solid;BORDER-BOTTOM-STYLE:none;PADDING-BOTTOM:0in;PADDING-TOP:3pt;BORDER-RIGHT-STYLE:none;PADDING-LEFT:0in;BORDER-LEFT-STYLE:none;PADDING-RIGHT:0in">
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><b><span style="FONT-SIZE:11pt;FONT-FAMILY:Calibri,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="FONT-SIZE:11pt;FONT-FAMILY:Calibri,sans-serif"><span> </span><a style="TEXT-DECORATION:underline;COLOR:blue" href="mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org" target="_blank">goal-bounces@eprints.org</a><span> </span>[<a href="mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org" target="_blank">mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org</a>]<span> </span><b>On Behalf Of<span> </span></b>Gerritsma,
Wouter<br><b>Sent:</b><span> </span>Monday,
December 09, 2013 2:14 PM<br><b>To:</b><span> </span>Global Open Access List (Successor
of AmSci)<br><b>Subject:</b><span> </span>[GOAL] Re: Jeffrey Beall Needlessly
Compromises Credibility of Beall's List<u></u><u></u></span></div></div></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><u></u><u></u></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Verdana,sans-serif;COLOR:rgb(31,73,125)" lang="EN-GB">Dear
all.<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Verdana,sans-serif;COLOR:rgb(31,73,125)" lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Verdana,sans-serif;COLOR:rgb(31,73,125)" lang="EN-GB">Has
this article really been written by Jeffrey Beall?<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Verdana,sans-serif;COLOR:rgb(31,73,125)" lang="EN-GB">He
has been victim of a smear campaign before!<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Verdana,sans-serif;COLOR:rgb(31,73,125)" lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Verdana,sans-serif;COLOR:rgb(31,73,125)" lang="EN-GB">I
don’t see he has claimed this article on his blog<span> </span></span><span lang="EN-GB"><a style="TEXT-DECORATION:underline;COLOR:blue" href="http://scholarlyoa.com/" target="_blank">http://scholarlyoa.com/</a><span> </span></span><span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Verdana,sans-serif;COLOR:rgb(31,73,125)" lang="EN-GB">or
his tweet stream @Jeffrey_Beall (which actually functions as his RSS
feed).<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Verdana,sans-serif;COLOR:rgb(31,73,125)" lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Verdana,sans-serif;COLOR:rgb(31,73,125)" lang="EN-GB">I
really like to hear from the man himself on his own
turf.<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Verdana,sans-serif;COLOR:rgb(31,73,125)" lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Verdana,sans-serif;COLOR:rgb(31,73,125)" lang="EN-GB">Wouter<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Verdana,sans-serif;COLOR:rgb(31,73,125)" lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Verdana,sans-serif;COLOR:rgb(31,73,125)" lang="EN-GB"> <u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Verdana,sans-serif;COLOR:rgb(31,73,125)" lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><b><span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="FONT-SIZE:10pt;FONT-FAMILY:Tahoma,sans-serif"><span> </span><a style="TEXT-DECORATION:underline;COLOR:blue" href="mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org" target="_blank">goal-bounces@eprints.org</a><span> </span>[<a style="TEXT-DECORATION:underline;COLOR:blue" href="mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org" target="_blank">mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org</a>]<span> </span><b>On Behalf Of<span> </span></b>Stevan
Harnad<br><b>Sent:</b><span> </span>maandag
9 december 2013 16:04<br><b>To:</b><span> </span>Global Open Access List (Successor
of AmSci)<br><b>Subject:</b><span> </span>[GOAL] Jeffrey Beall Needlessly
Compromises Credibility of Beall's List<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB">Beall, Jeffrey (2013)<span> </span><a style="TEXT-DECORATION:underline;COLOR:blue" href="http://triplec.at/index.php/tripleC/article/view/525/514" target="_blank">The
Open-Access Movement is Not Really about Open Access</a>. TripleC
Communication, Capitalism & Critique Journal. 11(2): 589-597<span> </span><a style="TEXT-DECORATION:underline;COLOR:blue" href="http://triplec.at/index.php/tripleC/article/view/525/514" target="_blank">http://triplec.at/index.php/tripleC/article/view/525/514</a><u></u><u></u></span></div>
</div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB">This wacky article is going to be fun to review. I still think
Jeff Beall is doing something useful with his naming and shaming of junk OA
journals, but I now realize that he is driven by some sort of fanciful
conspiracy theory! "OA is all an anti-capitlist plot." (Even on a quick skim
it is evident that Jeff's article is rife with half-truths, errors and
downright nonsense. Pity. It will diminish the credibility of his valid
exposés, but maybe this is a good thing, if the judgment and motivation
behind Beall's list is as kooky as this article! But alas it will now also
give the genuine "predatory" junk-journals some specious arguments for
discrediting Jeff's work altogether. Of course it will also give the
publishing lobby some good sound-bites, but they use them at their peril,
because of all the other nonsense in which they are
nested!) <u></u><u></u></span></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB">Before I do a critique later today), I want to post some tidbits
to set the stage:<u></u><u></u></span></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div></div>
<blockquote style="MARGIN:5pt 0in 5pt 30pt">
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><b><i><span lang="EN-GB">JB:<span> </span></span></i></b><i><span lang="EN-GB">"<b>ABSTRACT</b>: While the open-access (OA) movement purports
to be about making scholarly content open-access, its true motives are
much different. The OA movement is an anti-corporatist movement that wants
to deny the freedom of the press to companies it disagrees with. The
movement is also actively imposing onerous mandates on researchers,
mandates that restrict individual freedom. To boost the open-access
movement, its leaders sacrifice the academic futures of young scholars and
those from developing countries, pressuring them to publish in
lower-quality open-access journals. The open-access movement has
fostered the creation of numerous predatory publishers and standalone
journals, increasing the amount of research misconduct in scholarly
publications and the amount of pseudo-science that is published as if it
were authentic science."</span></i><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><b><i><span lang="EN-GB">JB: </span></i></b><i><span lang="EN-GB">"[F]rom their
high-salaried comfortable positions…OA advocates... demand that
for-profit, scholarly journal publishers not be involved in scholarly
publishing and devise ways (such as green open-access) to defeat and
eliminate them...</span></i><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><b><i><span lang="EN-GB">JB: </span></i></b><i><span lang="EN-GB">"OA advocates use
specious arguments to lobby for mandates, focusing only on the supposed
economic benefits of open access and ignoring the value additions provided
by professional publishers. The arguments imply that publishers are not
really needed; all researchers need to do is upload their work, an action
that constitutes publishing, and that this act results in a product that
is somehow similar to the products that professional publishers produce….
</span></i><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><b><i><span lang="EN-GB">JB: </span></i></b><i><span lang="EN-GB">"The open-access
movement isn't really about open access. Instead, it is about
collectivizing production and denying the freedom of the press from those
who prefer the subscription model of scholarly publishing. It is an
anti-corporatist, oppressive and negative movement, one that uses young
researchers and researchers from developing countries as pawns to
artificially force the make-believe gold and green open-access models to
work. The movement relies on unnatural mandates that take free choice away
from individual researchers, mandates set and enforced by an onerous cadre
of Soros-funded European autocrats...</span></i><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><b><i><span lang="EN-GB">JB:<span> </span></span></i></b><i><span lang="EN-GB">"The open-access movement is a failed social movement and a
false messiah, but its promoters refuse to admit this. The emergence of
numerous predatory publishers – a product of the open-access movement –
has poisoned scholarly communication, fostering research misconduct and
the publishing of pseudo-science, but OA advocates refuse to recognize the
growing problem. By instituting a policy of exchanging funds between
researchers and publishers, the movement has fostered corruption on a
grand scale. Instead of arguing for openaccess, we must determine and
settle on the best model for the distribution of scholarly research, and
it's clear that neither green nor gold open-access is that
model...</span></i><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div></blockquote>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><i><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></i></div></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB">And then, my own
personal favourites:<u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div>
<blockquote style="MARGIN:5pt 0in 5pt 30pt">
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><b><i><span lang="EN-GB">JB:<span> </span></span></i></b><i><span lang="EN-GB">"Open access advocates think they know better than everyone
else and want to impose their policies on others. Thus, the open access
movement has the serious side-effect of taking away other's freedom from
them. We observe this tendency in institutional mandates. Harnad
(2013) goes so far as to propose [an]…Orwellian system of mandates…
documented [in a] table of mandate strength, with the most restrictive
pegged at level 12, with the designation "immediate deposit + performance
evaluation (no waiver option)". This Orwellian system of mandates is
documented in Table 1... </span></i><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div></div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><b><i><span lang="EN-GB">JB: </span></i></b><i><span lang="EN-GB">"A social movement
that needs mandates to work is doomed to fail. A social movement that uses
mandates is abusive and tantamount to academic slavery. Researchers need
more freedom in their decisions not less. How can we expect and demand
academic freedom from our universities when we impose oppressive mandates
upon ourselves?..."</span></i><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div></blockquote>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB">Stay tuned!…<u></u><u></u></span></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><b><span lang="EN-GB">Stevan Harnad</span></b><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div></div>
<div>
<div style="FONT-SIZE:12pt;FONT-FAMILY:'Times New Roman',serif;MARGIN:0in 0in 0pt"><span lang="EN-GB"><u></u><u></u></span></div></div></div></div>_______________________________________________<br>GOAL
mailing list<br><a style="TEXT-DECORATION:underline;COLOR:blue" href="mailto:GOAL@eprints.org" target="_blank">GOAL@eprints.org</a><br><a style="TEXT-DECORATION:underline;COLOR:blue" href="http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal" target="_blank">http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal</a><br>
</div></span></blockquote></div><br></div></div>_______________________________________________<br>GOAL
mailing list<br><a href="mailto:GOAL@eprints.org" target="_blank">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></div></div></div>
<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>
<br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><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>+44-1223-763069
</div>