I not sure I understand Eric's 'unaddressed problem'. Web of Science has a
very rigorous selection policy and Jeffrey Beall has an informative listing of
'suspect' OA journals. Shouldn't these resources provide prospective authors
with sufficient information to make an informed decision on whe
Dear
I also appreciate such a discussion.
There are some fundamentals problem with the current situation in
scientific edition.
For me, even though there are numerous free journasl, most of the
prominents ones are still owned by too few large companies that makes
too much money. This is sim
Thanks for the info ... you need to work with Chemical Abstracts and DOAJ to
see that your journals receive proper attention.
Dana L. Roth
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/chem
hi Eric,
It is good to see a discussion of this topic. Some preliminary thoughts:
The journal-level peer review process involved in the SSHRC Aid to Scholarly
Journals is a type of model I suggest others look at. The primary questions
have nothing to do with metrics, but rather are qualitative,
Hi List
Hi list
My previous efforts rapidly went off-topic, so I’m making a second effort to
reload the questions to the list with the hope of receiving more input on this
important topic.
Back to our still largely unaddressed problem, I am re-inviting people to
contribute ideas, focussing awa
Hi List
I’d like to steer this debate away from individuals and bring it back to the
questions that need to be addressed in a fairly urgent manner. Though I
personally don’t agree with many if not most positions that Jeffrey has taken
over the years on different subjects, and many list members
Although I often disagree with Beall and share the concerns of OA colleagues
about his list, two comments:
It is appropriate to ask about business interests. When Elsevier comments on
open access policy, it is important to know that their perspective is likely
influenced by financial motives. T
Just to add that I too agree completely with Chris and Jan. Éric (perhaps
out of legal or commercial caution) responded to Beall in a polite deadpan
style, but Beall's posting cannot be described as anything less that
outrageous. A tendentious public query about undeclared interests coupled
with a
All I want to say is that I agree wholeheartedly with Chris. He definitely
isn't the only one to be outraged.
Johannes (Jan) J M Velterop
Sent from Jan Velterop's iPhone. Please excuse for brevity and typos.
> On 3 Oct 2015, at 11:32, Chris Zielinski wrote:
>
> I have no personal involvemen
I have no personal involvement in this issue (other than being aghast when
SciELO appeared on the List of Predatory Journals recently - it now seems
to have been removed, after multiple protests) and don't know any of the
participants personally, but I can't be the only one who finds this post
from
10 matches
Mail list logo
