brent...@uliege.be writes
> In other words - and even if we restrict our thinking to COVID-19 -
> what humankind needs urgently NOW, is an open access to all the
> relevant research literature in a much wider domain than just that
> of this virus. Very simply, to all the scholarly literature.
Jean-Claude Guédon writes
> The right way to go is OA free for authors and for readers, which means that
> it must be subsidized. But that is all right because scientific research is
> subsidized and scientific communication is an integral part of scientific
> research (and it costs only 1% of
Sarven Capadisli writes
> Does the "the right way" to contribute to scientific communication in
> context of OA require the use of (non- or for-profit) third-party
> services as opposed to self-publishing?
Yes, it does
> If so, why?
because there needs to be persistency to the published
COVID-19 is a pandemic that is in the process of infecting and killing many
people around the world. The immediate priority needs to be slowing the spread,
understanding the virus, finding treatments and a vaccine.
COVID-19 is also an opportune case study in areas relating to open access and
Lovely response, Peter.
And, yes, let us remember the example set by Latin America, and in
particular by Amelica. They are now the true leaders of open access.
Incidentally, everyone should read this:
https://src-online.ca/index.php/src/article/view/347. It is an
important article
The first point, of course, is that if the "tenured saint" is not
available, the greedy devil is not the only behavioural alternative.
Neither is sainthood, so to speak, dependent upon tenure. Tenure was
invented to protect free expression. It might be useful to remind
everyone that many
Sorry that this has become confrontational, but I think it's important that
we are not drawn into this idea that Elsevier is part of a community. It is
not. It is a ruthless commercial organization which, over the 15 years I
have had to deal with it has tried every trick in the book to make it
Does the "the right way" to contribute to scientific communication in
context of OA require the use of (non- or for-profit) third-party
services as opposed to self-publishing? If so, why?
-Sarven
https://csarven.ca/#i
On 31/03/2020 17.17, Jean-Claude Guédon wrote:
> I also strongly agree with
I am very sorry, but « everyone concerned at Elsevier from the top to the
bottom and the bottom to the top » doesn’t seem to understand what research on
a virus is about.
In order to be innovative and creative, researchers working on a specific virus
need of course access to all the existing
Dear Mr Archambault,
As far as I consider, today it is rather clear : the solution to find
ways to cure and protect the world from vaccine (not only the
coronavirus that infect us today) will *only* come from novel ideas,
that will be most probably found outside of the limited fiel of "corona
Peter, Stevan, and Jean-Claude,
Sorry if my life's circumstances led me to become a greedy devil instead of a
tenured saint.
That said, I don't think it's right to assume that we are working out of
self-interest to build the Coronavirus Research Hub - as early as January
individuals at
On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 4:21 PM Jean-Claude Guédon <
jean.claude.gue...@umontreal.ca> wrote:
>
> One last note: OA will succeed, despite what Stevan says. Let us shape OA
> the right way, and certainly not in the way supported by Elsevier: in their
> view, OA is a "charitable" gesture that is
I also strongly agree with Peter. As for Éric Archambault, it is simply
a pity to see greed trump principles.
One last note: OA will succeed, despite what Stevan says. Let us shape
OA the right way, and certainly not in the way supported by Elsevier: in
their view, OA is a "charitable"
A PubMed search for "coronavirus" limited to the past 10 years then limited
again to free full-text yields results of 55% free full-text. With no date
limit, it's 46%.
This search will get at research on COVID and the next most relevant research,
all the other coronaviruses (mers, sars, common
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 7:48 PM Éric Archambault <
eric.archamba...@science-metrix.com> wrote:
> Peter,
>
>
>
> Two months ago, that is, on January 27, we started work at Elsevier to
> make available as much as possible of the scholarly literature on
> coronavirus research easily discoverable and
15 matches
Mail list logo
