Hello Stevan,
I feel you've misinterpreted my proposition on the text-e forum.
http://text-e.org/debats/index.cfm?conftext_ID=7
I do feel you're right to say that self-archiving is something good to
do NOW.
My problem is that monopolistic publishers ALREADY have science under
their control. So we have two ways of fighting for freedom of science:
- one is self archiving (the civil society of science action)
- another one is to impede monopolistic publishers' hold on science.
This battlefield needs to convince and to get public bodies (from the
local/university level to the international level) on our side.
You say :
> Prions que la privatisation de la science ne touchera pas a son
> reportage dans les revues expertisee. Et pendant que la pratique du
> reportage continue, liberons les rapports en-ligne. Amen.
> Stevan Harnad, jeudi 29 novembre 19:45 (heure de Paris)
I fear that the way monopolistic publishers assign copyright (and
develop new tools on behalf of this catalog property) shows that this
privatisation of science reporting is already under way.
And as I alway says : self-archiving gives scientists tools, objectives
and ethical solutions to act NOW. But we need more, and this will also
help the involved parties to choose. Consider that the french CNRS, only
a few years ago, said to its members never to put pre-prints on-line....
http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Hypermail/Theschat/0016.html
There's a long way to go and we need to clearly expose the complete
problem to convince.
I think that we don't only need answers to Henderson's views, but also
to give propositions to other persons who are wondering. For example
those in France who give the societies, journal to Elsevier ten years
ago...
And my only aim is to ADD other way to your self-archiving solution.
But I agree with your solution (and more, I will give one of my student
the projet of installing your
http://www.eprints.org self-archiving
software at my university).
Yours,
Hervé Le Crosnier
Received on Fri Dec 07 2001 - 15:20:39 GMT