[MODERATOR'S NOTE: The following posting by A. Koudinov appears
in full at https://mx2.arl.org/Lists/SPARC-OAForum/Message/413.html
Part of this posting (Item 1) has been removed here because it
concerns alleged conflict-of-interest matters regarding certain
journals, but has
[ Reply to Albert Henderson on thread:
Re: Nature's vs. Science's Embargo Policy
http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/2633.html ]
The nice thing about input-paid open access as practised by BioMed Central
is that the juxtaposition of universities (the bureaucracy, in
on Fri, 17 Jan 2003 Jan Velterop j...@biomedcentral.com read me wrong:
[ Reply to Albert Henderson on thread:
Re: Nature's vs. Science's Embargo Policy
http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/2633.html ]
The nice thing about input-paid open access as practised by
The one-size-fits-all syndrome strikes again. Scientific disciplines
are vastly different in terms of all the relevant variables here,
such as rejection rates, turnaround times, editorial structures, etc. I
understand that BMC's figure of $500 article-processing-charge (APC) per
published article
Manfredi La Manna wrote:
The one-size-fits-all syndrome strikes again. Scientific disciplines
are vastly different in terms of all the relevant variables here,
such as rejection rates, turnaround times, editorial structures, etc. I
understand that BMC's figure of $500
