I'm quite confident now that both free "no-frills" author-controlled
sites (like the arXiv) and standard "frill-filled" peer-reviewed
publishing can coexist, since they serve quite distinct purposes and in
some cases audiences. So no argument from me on Tim's # 2 or #3. But I
think there's a mis
On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, C. Lee Giles wrote:
> Is this just the beginning or an aberration?
There are at least 20,000 refereed journals.
http://www.ulrichsweb.com/ulrichsweb/
All their contents need to be freed online, and as soon as possible.
However, there are reasons to doubt that the fastest, saf
On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, C. Lee Giles wrote:
> Is this just the beginning or an aberration?
> [Journal Editorial Boartd Resignation/Migration]
Since you asked:
Neither (though I take your question). It's a recent step toward the
inevitable evaporation of what Stevan Harnad has rightly pointed out to
At 09:21 AM 10/9/2001 -0400, C. Lee Giles wrote:
Is this just the beginning or an aberration?
> Dear colleagues in machine learning,
>
> The forty people whose names appear below have resigned from the
> Editorial Board of the Machine Learning Journal (MLJ). We would
> like to make our resignat
Is this just the beginning or an aberration?
> --- Forwarded message --
> Date: Mon, 8 Oct 2001 14:33:25 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Michael Jordan
> To: connectioni...@cs.cmu.edu, u...@ghost.cs.orst.edu,
> bayes-n...@stat.cmu.edu,
> g...@kdnuggets.com, c...@cs.uiuc.edu, commun...@m
[Redirected from "No Free Lunches" Thread.]
On Tue, 9 Oct 2001, Andrew Wray wrote:
> But this still doesn't address the point of stable financing of the
> essential peer review process. This problem of stability is the main
> message I took from John Ewing's arcticle.
>
> Subscriptions are a fina
A few points of interest:
1) Ewing seems to forget that the money that goes to pay subscriptions
charges _is_ government or college money. Therefore, how can
toll-access publishers cry foul when funding bodies decide it would
make more sense to have free-access rather than toll-access (and to
fund
why this renewed discussion on long-time settled topic?
1. Scientific work is best bolstered by instant complete information on
what colleatues anywhere do.
> Thus instant free full text publication of newest results is mandatory.
Realization is by local Webserver of scientist, institute, departme
Dear Stevan
But this still doesn't address the point of stable financing of the essential
peer review process. This problem of stability is the main message I took from
John Ewing's arcticle.
Subscriptions are a financial firewall, author charges per page or per article
might work for some aut
It seems clear to me that at research institutions, delayed publication of
significant journals will not be acceptable, even if only for a month or
two. Such institutions will continue to subscribe to avoid the delay.
Journals of less significance to a particular institution have been in
most case
10 matches
Mail list logo
