<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><div>Let me get this right, Jean-Claude mentioning the Budapest Open Access Initiative to show that re-use was an integral part of the original definition of open access and not some later ('quasi-religeous') addition as Sally avers. And by doing so he is betraying some type of religious zeal? </div><div><br></div><div>One of the interesting aspect of the open access debate has been the language. Those who argue against OA have been keen to paint OA advocates as 'zealots', extremists, and impractical idealists. I've always felt that such characterisation was an attempt to mask the paucity of argument.</div><div><br></div><div>David</div><div><br></div><div><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-align: -webkit-auto; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><span class="Apple-style-span" style="border-collapse: separate; color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: Helvetica; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: 2; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: 2; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-horizontal-spacing: 0px; -webkit-border-vertical-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-decorations-in-effect: none; -webkit-text-size-adjust: auto; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; font-size: medium; "><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><br></div><div style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><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 11 Dec 2013, at 22:30, Sally Morris wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><blockquote type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=Windows-1252">
<meta name="GENERATOR" content="MSHTML 11.00.9600.16428">
<div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span class="904442822-11122013"><font color="#0000ff" size="2" face="Arial">I actually think that J-C's response illustrates very clearly
how OA has been mistaken for a religion, with its very own 'gospel'. This,
IMHO, is part of its problem!</font></span></div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span class="904442822-11122013"><font color="#0000ff" size="2" face="Arial"></font></span> </div>
<div dir="ltr" align="left"><span class="904442822-11122013"><font color="#0000ff" size="2" face="Arial">Sally</font></span></div>
<div> </div>
<div align="left"><font size="2" face="Arial">Sally Morris</font></div>
<div align="left"><font size="2" face="Arial">South House, The Street, Clapham,
Worthing, West Sussex, UK BN13 3UU</font></div>
<div align="left"><font size="2" face="Arial">Tel: +44 (0)1903
871286</font></div>
<div align="left"><font size="2" face="Arial">Email:
<a href="mailto:sally@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk">sally@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk</a></font></div>
<div> </div><br>
<div lang="en-us" class="OutlookMessageHeader" dir="ltr" align="left">
<hr tabindex="-1">
<font size="2" face="Tahoma"><b>From:</b> <a href="mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org">goal-bounces@eprints.org</a>
[mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Jean-Claude
Guédon<br><b>Sent:</b> 10 December 2013 15:26<br><b>To:</b>
<a href="mailto:goal@eprints.org">goal@eprints.org</a><br><b>Subject:</b> [GOAL] Re: Jeffrey Beall Needlessly
Compromises Credibility ofBeall's List<br></font><br></div>
<div></div>In response to Sally, I would remind her that re-use was part of the
original BOAI declaration. Scholars and teachers need more than eye-contact with
articles. So, this is not a secondary point. <br><br>The immediacy issue
concerns deposit; it is simply a pragmatic and obvious point: capturing an
article at time of acceptance is optimal for exposure and circulation of
information. If the publisher does not allow public exposure and imposes an
embargo - thus slowing down the circulation of knowledge -, the private request
button allows for eye contact, at least. This button solution is not optimal,
but it will do on a pragmatic scale so long as it is needed to circumvent
publishers' tactics.<br><br>Cost savings are not part of BOAI; it is a request
by administrators of research centres and their libraries. This said, costs of
OA publishing achieved by a platform such as Scielo are way beneath the prices
practised by commercial publishers (including non-profit ones). And it should
become obvious that if you avoid 45% profit rates, you should
benefit.<br><br>The distinction between "nice" and "nasty" publishers is of
unknown origin and I would not subscribe to it. More fundamentally, we
should ask and ask again whether scientific publishing is meant to help
scientific research, or the reverse. Seen from the former perspective, embargoes
appear downright absurd.<br><br>As for why OA has not been widely accepted now,
the answer is not difficult to find: researchers are evaluated; the evaluation,
strangely enough, rests on journal reputations rather than on the intrinsic
quality of articles. Researchers simply adapt to this weird competitive
environment as best they can, and do not want to endanger their career prospects
in any way. As a result, what counts for them is not how good their work is, but
rather <b>where</b> they can publish it. Open Access, by stressing a return to
intrinsic quality of work, implicitly challenges the present competition rules.
As such, it appears at best uncertain or even threatening to researchers under
career stress. So long as evaluation rests on journal titles, the essential
source of power within scientific publishing will rest with the major
international publishers. They obviously believe research was invented to serve
them!<br><br>The interesting point about mega journals, incidentally, is that
they are not really journals, but publishing platforms. Giving an impact factor
to PLoS One is stupid: citation cultures vary from discipline to discipline, and
the mix of disciplines within PLoS One varies with time. Doing a simple average
of the citations of the whole is methodologically faulty: remember that
scientists in biomed disciplines quote about four times as much as
mathematicians. What if, over a certain period of time, the proportion of
mathematical articles triples for whatever reason? The raw impact factor will go
down. Does this mean anything in terms of quality? Of course
not!<br><br>Jean-Claude Guédon<br><br>Le mardi 10 décembre 2013 à 13:36 +0000,
Sally Morris a écrit :
<blockquote type="CITE">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.<br><br> <br><br>I would put them under two general
headings:<br><br> <br><br>1)
What is the objective of OA?<br><br> <br><br>I originally understood the
objective to be to make scholarly research articles, in some form, accessible
to all those who needed to read them. Subsequent refinements such
as 'immediately', 'published version' and 'free to reuse' may have
acquired quasi-religious status, but are surely secondary to this main
objective.<br><br> <br><br>However, two other, financial, objectives
(linked to each other, but not to the above) have gained increasing
prominence. The first is the alleged cost saving (or at least cost
shifting). The second - more malicious, and originally (but no longer)
denied by OA's main proponents - is the undermining of publishers'
businesses. If this were to work, we may be sure the effects would not
be choosy about 'nice' or 'nasty'
publishers.<br><br> <br><br>2)
Why hasn't OA been widely adopted by now?<br><br> <br><br>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?
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.<br><br> <br><br>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? Just asking
;-)<br><br> <br><br>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.<br><br> <br><br>Merry
Christmas!<br><br> <br><br>Sally <br><br><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE"> </blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE"><font size="2">Sally Morris</font> </blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE"><font size="2">South House, The Street, Clapham,
Worthing, West Sussex, UK BN13 3UU</font> </blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE"><font size="2">Tel: +44 (0)1903 871286</font>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE"><font size="2">Email:
<a href="mailto:sally@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk">sally@morris-assocs.demon.co.uk</a></font> </blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE"> </blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<hr align="center">
<br><b><font size="2">From:</font></b><font size="2"> <a href="mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org">goal-bounces@eprints.org</a>
[mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org] </font><b><font size="2">On Behalf Of
</font></b><font size="2">David Prosser</font><br><b><font size="2">Sent:</font></b><font size="2"> 09 December 2013 22:10</font><br><b><font size="2">To:</font></b><font size="2"> Global Open Access List (Successor of
AmSci)</font><br><b><font size="2">Subject:</font></b><font size="2"> [GOAL] Re:
Jeffrey Beall Needlessly Compromises Credibility ofBeall's
List</font><br><br><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">'Lackeys'? This is going beyond parody. </blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE"><br><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">David </blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE"><br><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">On 9 Dec 2013, at 21:45, Beall, Jeffrey wrote:
</blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">Wouter, </blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">Hello, yes, I wrote the article, I stand by it, and
I take responsibility for it. </blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">I would ask Prof. Harnad to clarify one thing in his
email below, namely this statement, "OA is all an anti-capitlist plot."
</blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">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.
</blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">Prof. Harnad and his lackeys are responding just as
my article predicts. </blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">Jeffrey Beall </blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><b>From:</b> <font color="#0000ff"><a href="mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org">goal-bounces@eprints.org</a></font> [mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org] <b>On
Behalf Of </b>Gerritsma, Wouter<br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, December
09, 2013 2:14 PM<br><b>To:</b> Global Open Access List (Successor of
AmSci)<br><b>Subject:</b> [GOAL] Re: Jeffrey Beall Needlessly
Compromises Credibility of Beall's List </blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">Dear all. </blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">Has this article really been written by Jeffrey
Beall? </blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">He has been victim of a smear campaign before!
</blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">I don’t see he has claimed this article on his
blog <font color="#0000ff"><a href="http://scholarlyoa.com/">http://scholarlyoa.com/</a></font> or
his tweet stream @Jeffrey_Beall (which actually functions as his RSS feed).
</blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">I really like to hear from the man himself on his
own turf. </blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">Wouter </blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">
</blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><b>From:</b> <font color="#0000ff"><a href="mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org">goal-bounces@eprints.org</a></font> [<font color="#0000ff"><a href="mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org">mailto:goal-bounces@eprints.org</a></font>] <b>On
Behalf Of </b>Stevan Harnad<br><b>Sent:</b> maandag 9 december
2013 16:04<br><b>To:</b> Global Open Access List (Successor of
AmSci)<br><b>Subject:</b> [GOAL] Jeffrey Beall Needlessly Compromises
Credibility of Beall's List </blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">Beall, Jeffrey (2013) <font color="#0000ff"><a href="http://triplec.at/index.php/tripleC/article/view/525/514">The
Open-Access Movement is Not Really about Open Access</a></font>. TripleC
Communication, Capitalism & Critique Journal. 11(2): 589-597 <font color="#0000ff"><a href="http://triplec.at/index.php/tripleC/article/view/525/514">http://triplec.at/index.php/tripleC/article/view/525/514</a></font>
</blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">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!)
</blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">Before I do a critique later today), I want to post
some tidbits to set the stage: </blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote><b><i>JB: </i></b><i>"</i><i><b>ABSTRACT</b></i><i>:
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."</i>
</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote><b><i>JB: </i></b><i>"[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...</i>
</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote><b><i>JB: </i></b><i>"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…. </i>
</blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote><b><i>JB: </i></b><i>"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...</i> </blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote><b><i>JB: </i></b><i>"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...</i> </blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">And then, my own personal favourites:
</blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote><b><i>JB: </i></b><i>"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...
</i> </blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote><br></blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote><b><i>JB: </i></b><i>"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?..."</i> </blockquote></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">Stay tuned!… </blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><b>Stevan Harnad</b> </blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE"><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE">
<blockquote type="CITE">_______________________________________________<br>GOAL mailing
list<br><font color="#0000ff"><a href="mailto:GOAL@eprints.org">GOAL@eprints.org</a></font><br><font color="#0000ff"><a href="http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal">http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal</a></font><br><br></blockquote></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE"><br><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="CITE"><pre>_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
<a href="mailto:GOAL@eprints.org">GOAL@eprints.org</a>
<a href="http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal">http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal</a>
</pre></blockquote><br>
<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td>-- <pre>Jean-Claude Guédon
Professeur titulaire
Littérature comparée
Université de Montréal
</pre></td></tr></tbody></table></div>
_______________________________________________<br>GOAL mailing list<br><a href="mailto:GOAL@eprints.org">GOAL@eprints.org</a><br>http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal<br></blockquote></div><br></body></html>