Update on responses about (1) continuing the Forum (2) Richard Poynder as new
moderator:

AGAINST CONTINUING AMSCI:


ARIF JINHA: I believe it would be better to have one forum, the BOAI.  This
forum has developed a doctrinal bias defined by the values and personality of
its leadership.  Though the leadership is to be commended for its credibility
and vigour, it is not without its blind spots. It has not always OPEN to a
diversity of perspectives.  AMSCI is driven by assertive and competitive
advocacy for mandates over Gold OA publishing.  The rush to conclusion on the
right path is premature and overly authoritative in its expression, therefore it
is alienating.  In truth, we have only really got started with the web in the
last 10 years and authority is completely flattened by the learning curve. The
BOAI is much wider in its representation of Open Access alternatives, it is
therefore more neutral as well as having a wider reach for the promotion of
Green OA.  It means less duplication and less work devoted to instant
communication, giving more time to develop a rigorous and scientific approach to
meta-scholarship in the digital age.


FOR CONTINUING AMSCI:


SUBBIAH ARUNACHALAM: First, I wish to express my grateful thanks to Stevan for
all that he has done so far, and in particular for moderating this Forum for so
long and so well. That he will continue to devote much of his time to promoting
open access and institutional repositories gives me strength to do the same.
Second, if Richard Poynder agrees (or if we could persuade him) to moderate this
list, there is nothing like it. The baton would have moved to safe hands. Not
only he has the stamina of a long distance runner, but he is also endowed with
the qualities needed for a moderator. He is knowledgeable and levelheaded.
Welcome Richard!


DOMINIQUE BABINI: Discussions and ideas in this forum are also inspiring for
regional OA forums and lists, e.g., the Latin America and the Caribbean Open
Access List (LLAAR, in Spanish). Thank you, Stevan, for your dedication as
moderator all these years, and especially for your new OA initiatives and ideas.
Thank you for your Skype contribution at the OA Experts Meeting last week in
UNESCO headquarters, where we missed you [in person].  I also support Richard
Poynder as [new] moderator for this Forum.  


MICHAEL E. SMITH: I am in favor of continuing the list, and either of the people
you mentioned as potential moderators would be good choices.


PAOLA GARGIULO: I also agree that the list should continue. I'm in favour or
Richard Poynder as moderator. Hope you will continue to contribute.


PETER SUBER: If Richard is willing to moderate, I vote for him.  I second 
Alma's
reasons why Richard would do well in this role.  I second Arthur's best wishes
to you, and I second (or third) Barbara and Hélène's tribute to your work.
 Finally, as the former moderator of SOAF and BOAI, I welcome you to civilian
life.  It's amazing what one can do when one has more time to do it.


BERNARD RENTIER: I vote for Richard Poynder. The excellence of his critical and
fair papers speaks for his designation. If he is willing to do that, I am sure
he will be an outstanding moderator. And that this will let Stevan be even more
tirelessly to the point in every debate!

TOM COCHRANE: The value of the Forum cannot be overstated. It has provided a
unique service in assessing the events and health of OA developments. It would
be a regressive step in several ways if it were to fall over. It is not too much
to claim that its way of charting developments, alerting readers to new issues,
identifying useful research and work on OA, and in your hands, reminding its
readership of the main issues – all these have had a direct impact on 
practical
developments. This has occurred to a degree that no single one of us – from
whatever part of the world -  can comprehensively take in. But believe me, it
has played a vital role. But individual workloads need to be shared, and we at
QUT understand your reasoning. We are happy with the Richard Poynder suggestion.


ELOY RODRIGUES:  I also support Richard Poynder for moderator.  I strongly
support the continuation of the AmSci Forum, and I regret your decision of
stepping down as moderator (even though I understand your reasons, and I do hope
that it will turn out the right decision for you, and your efforts for OA
progress).  Thanks for your tireless work for Open Access! All the best (from
Rio de Janeiro, where I was also archivangilizing for ID/OA mandates, at the
Portuguese-Brazilian OA conference).


KEITH JEFFERY: I am sorry it has come to this; you know I support your point of
view and moderation does require correction of misconceptions as well as just
posting. I wish the Amsci list to continue and Richard is, of course, an
excellent choice as future moderator.


ANDREW A ADAMS: I am in favour of the forum continuing to operate. I feel
Richard would make an excellent new moderator.


PIPPA SMART: I am in favour of the forum continuing and would be very happy for
Richard Poynder to moderate.

MARC COUTURE: I definitely wish the forum to continue. I may be only the
occasional contributor, but I've always been a very steady reader. As to you not
being the moderator anymore, I think it's even a good thing, not because I share
the opinion that a moderator should be neutral and discreet, but because it will
spare you some precious time you could devote to useful purposes, OA-related or
not. Note that I assume we will continue to benefit, in the forum, from the
seemingly inexhaustible energy and the flawless, razor-sharp logic of our
"weary" archivangelist.


BARRY MAHON:  As a long time stirring stick in the OA (hard to know what word 
to
use to describe it) world, and having crossed swords with both Stevan and
Richard over the years, I have a heavy heart in accepting Stevan's decision but
an uplift that Richard has volunteered. It will, I wish, go on....and I'll be
there, or here, whichever is the more appropriate.

JEAN-CLAUDE GUÉDON: I also think this list should go on. And  having Richard 
or
Thomas moderate is a good idea too.

BOB PARKS: Congratulations on stepping down. I hope it gives you more time to
pursue OA!!! Either Krichel or Poynder would be a good moderator.  I fear that
Krichel is over committed.


HEATHER MORRISON: Thanks very much for moderating the list all these years! I
hope that the list will continue, and would support either Richard Poynder or
Thomas Krichel as moderators.


SALLY MORRIS: The support for Richard as moderator of the continuing list seems
clear. We really don't need to see all the messages - I thought that was the
point of keeping them off the list?


THOMAS KRICHEL: I think it should continue, as it appears to be the largest and
most active forum.  I volunteer to do it….  If Richard wants to do it, I'd 
be
happy not to.


RICHARD POYNDER: Well I certainly vote for it to continue. I would even put my
name down for the moderator's hat if it was felt appropriate for a journalist to
run such a forum, and people believed I could do the job adequately


ALMA SWAN: I am writing to nominate Richard Poynder as the new moderator for the
AmSci Forum. I think he brings the right qualities - amongst them honesty,
fairness, intellectual curiousness and efficiency - and is hugely respected as
an independent, critical thinker on the issues that AmSci covers. I want the
Forum to continue because it is a real discussion list rather than a bulletin
board…


HELENE BOSC: In memory of the remarkable work done by Stevan Harnad for Open
Access through this list, during 14 years, I wish it continues... Richard
Poynder would be a perfect moderator!


BARBARA KIRSOP: If Stevan feels he can better operate in support of OA not as
the moderator, then it would be great indeed if Richard Poynder would adopt the
mantle. I think AMSCI should continue. I am somewhat in favour of a name change
to highlight OA rather than the US - a name change could be a mini-re-launch
perhaps and bring in new contributors - a fitting tribute to Stevan's past
efforts.


ARTHUR SALE: May I wish you the best as non-moderator. It is the right decision
for you, I think. This may be a shock to you that I think that it is a plus, but
I think we need to get new ideas into the OA transition, and you have done your
bit and a lot more… and perhaps I can even convince you eventually that the
Titanium Road is the way to go now! You will be bombarded with messages begging
you to reconsider, but I do think it is the right decision. Then you can enjoy
being yourself without constraint. No one person can bear the weight of the
world, not even Atlas.


IRYNA KUCHMA:The AmSci Open Access Forum is an active discussion forum (SOAF and
BOAI are more like the announcement lists) and my answer is (1) definitely to
continue. It's sad that you've decided to step down as a moderator. I wish I
could help you with moderating it, but I am travelling a lot and sometimes not
able to moderate the BOAI on time…. Hope you will find the ways to continue.






Reply via email to