[GOAL] Re: A new high level peered review journal at nearly zero cost by Tim Gowers

[Y.Nobis]

hi Dana.

I doubt it, unless you can motivate HEP people to buy into the concept...

Yvonne
>A great idea ... that hopefully will make SCOAP3 redundant.
>
> Dana L. Roth Millikan Library / Caltech 1-32 1200 E. California Blvd. 
> Pasadena, CA 91125 626-395-6423 fax 626-792-7540 
> dzr...@library.caltech.edu 
> http://library.caltech.edu/collections/chemistry.htm 
>  From: goal-boun...@eprints.org 
> [goal-boun...@eprints.org] on behalf of Nicolas Pettiaux 
> [nico...@pettiaux.be] Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2015 11:22 PM To: 
> goal@eprints.org Subject: [GOAL] A new high level peered review journal 
> at nearly zero cost by Tim Gowers
>
>Dear All,
>
>I want to share with you this information I have just come accross.
>
> A new post-publication high level peered review journal at nearly zero 
> cost, by a famous mathematician
>
>  
> https://gowers.wordpress.com/2015/09/10/discrete-analysis-an-arxiv-overlay-journal/
>
>Your comments are most welcome.
>
>Best regards,
>
>Nicolas
>

-- 
Yvonne Nobis

Head of Science Information Services

Betty and Gordon Moore Library
Wilberforce Road,
Cambridge, CB3 0WD.
Tel : 01223 765673

Central Science Library
Bene't Street,
Cambridge CB2 3PY.
Tel (01223)334744

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

[GOAL] Re: Dutch begin their Elsevier boycott

[Y.Nobis]

Hi all,

I fail to see how this is a 'library made' problem in any sense. The issue 
is that for many of us, our purchasing decisions are dictated to by our 
faculty. Interestingly in the physical sciences at least, I am now being 
asked to review (by academics) whether we should subscribe to journals at 
all.

Yvonne


>Thomas
>
> I don't think it's fair to say this is a problem made by libraries. It is 
> a systemic problem which calls for systemic solutions. Part of the 
> solution is to make OA more discoverable and this starts with systems 
> such as RePEC being more user-friendly and clearly and simply exposing 
> what is OA, instead of burying it among subscription-only contents.
>
> It's just too easy to single out one source of problem and claim that 
> "it" only has the solution. We have lost this capacity to feel concerned 
> individually and while we continue to be divided, large MNC continue to 
> rule. Kudos to the Dutch's universities for grouping their efforts, I 
> hope they succeed in getting a better deal.
>
>Éric
>
>
>
> -Original Message- From: goal-boun...@eprints.org 
> [mailto:goal-boun...@eprints.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Krichel Sent: 
> July-03-15 8:14 AM To: Global Open Access List (Successor of AmSci) 
> Subject: [GOAL] Re: Dutch begin their Elsevier boycott
>
>
>  Danny Kingsley writes
>
>> Dutch universities have begun their boycott of Elsevier due to a 
>> complete breakdown of negotiations over Open Access.
>
>  I guess the Summer silly season is here. 
>
>> As a first step in boycotting the publisher, the Association of 
>> Universities in the Netherlands (VSNU) has asked all scientists that 
>> are editor in chief of a journal published by Elsevier to give up 
>> their post.
>
>  It would be very foolish indeed for any academic to give up such a
>  prestigious post forever, presumably, to come in aid of a temporary,
>  presumably, boycott, with no compensation from the boycotters.
>
>> If this way of putting pressure on the publishers does not work, the 
>> next step would be to ask reviewers to stop working for Elsevier.
>
>  This may have a small effect since reviewing for journals is a
>  tedium to many academics. Dutch academics can use the boycott as as
>  excuse not to review. But publishers can draw on a non-Dutch
>  reviewers.
>
>> After that, scientists could be asked to stop publishing in Elsevier 
>> journals.
>
>  Good luck with that. As an academic you have to take submission
>  decisions based on the likelihood to be in a good journal, not
>  based on some boycott ideology. 
>
>  The whole strategy makes very little sense whatsoever from a
>  theoretical perspective thinking about academics' incentives. And
>  there is historical evidence that adds weight to the theoretical
>  argument. Recall the Public Library of Science.  Before it became a
>  publishing business, it was a grass root group. It issued a similar
>  boycott call. I can't find the text now. I guess they withdrew the
>  text from public view. By my impression it was completely
>  ineffective. 
>
>  Libraries have created, and continue to maintain the closed-access
>  publication system by subscribing to journals. They should stop
>  subscribing to journals and use the proceeds to fund open access
>  publications.  Publishers will get the same revenue stream but open
>  access is achieved. 
>
>  In short: Stop bothering academics and publishers about a
>  library-made problem. 
>
>

-- 
Yvonne Nobis

Head of Science Information Services

Betty and Gordon Moore Library
Wilberforce Road,
Cambridge, CB3 0WD.
Tel : 01223 765673

Central Science Library
Bene't Street,
Cambridge CB2 3PY.
Tel (01223)334744

___
GOAL mailing list
GOAL@eprints.org
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal