I've noticed that other than this list serve, blogs (at least, those by
academics) seem to be the most active discussion arena (at least in the
United States) on issues of open-access publishing.
For instance, see Crooked
Timber--
http://crookedtimber.org/2008/03/13/incentives-for-reviewing/#commen
t-232332
or, Marginal
Revolution--
http://www.marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2008/03/pub
lic-choice-o.html
Best,
Josh Jones
Stevan Harnad wrote:
>
>
> Begin forwarded message:
>
> *From: *Leslie Carr <lac -- ecs.soton.ac.uk>
> *Date: *March 10, 2008 5:53:10 AM EDT (CA)
> *To: *JISC-REPOSITORIES -- JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> *Subject: **Re: Central versus institutional self-archiving: 6 Mantras*
>
> On 10 Mar 2008, at 09:11, Andy Powell wrote:
>
> > Well, I hope that you are right... I certainly don't have the will or
> > ability to fight a political and technical agenda that has become so
> > entrenched worldwide and that says there is only one 'right' way of
> > achieving OA.
>
> Those who are involved in Open Access lobbying will be interested to
> hear that they have gone from being an ignored, sidelined special
> interest group, to being an entrenched worldwide movement. Even those
> who shout loudest for institutional repositories are doing so not
> because of some predisposition towards dogma, but because IRs seem the
> favourite choice out of a number of practical alternatives.
>
> Saying that we want to "build compelling scholarly social networks" or
> "surface scholarly content on the Web" is just another way of
> restating a shared goal of Open Access. Saying that "we might be
> better to start by thinking in terms of the social networks that
> currently exist in the research community" is to confirm what happened
> five years ago when the difference between discipline-grounded and
> institutionally-grounded repositories was being thrashed out. You
> comment that "social networks ... are largely independent of the
> institution", but that is only to take into account SOME facets of a
> researcher's social network - in particular it is to ignore the
> researcher's career development, promotion and contractual relationships.
>
> However, no-one who backs Open Access can afford to pish-tush any
> sound, practical and tested ideas about improving takeup, so bring
> them on! In fact, lay them down as part of the Developer Challenge in
> the forthcoming Open Repositories conference, and see if we can't get
> any of them prototyped for you. Web 2.0/social networks are taking up
> two sessions, so clearly repositories are already experimenting with
> these channels. http://or08.ecs.soton.ac.uk/
>
> But in the meantime, we have to recognise that titivating a user
> interface isn't going to turn anyone from a "heads down, don't have
> time to do what you ask" researcher into a grateful repository convert
> or even a Web 2.0 user!
> --
> Les Carr
>
Received on Thu Mar 13 2008 - 19:40:00 GMT