Re: The Mandate of Open Access Institutional Repository Managers

From: leo waaijers <leowaa_at_xs4all.nl>
Date: Sat, 31 Jul 2010 17:56:20 +0200

Dear Stevan,

Yes, I think that a public discussion of your rigidity may advance things. Not
your rigidity as a personal psychological feature, but as an operational or
tactical factor. My point is, your rigidity is not a success factor.

Sometimes I am dreaming of an agreement between Green and Gold in the form of a
mutually accepted simple overview of pro's and con's of both options. We then
could stop the relentless internal debates in the OA movement and use the
released energy to approach funders together and tell them that if they take OA
seriously, and I am convinced most of them do, they can make a contingency based
choice.

I always have the feeling that your rigidity prevents such a development. Am I
right?

Best wishes,
Leo.


 

Stevan Harnad wrote:
      On 2010-07-30, at 4:54 PM, leo waaijers wrote:

      But shouldn't you accept then that different repository
      managers may have various 'mandates'? You seem so rigid in
      this.


Dear Leo,

Yes, I am rigid as rigid can be on what makes sense and what does not. But
why does this trouble you? I have absolutely no power. It is not I who set
repository managers' or repository managers' mandates: All I do is try
(mostly in vain!) to help them make more sense out of what they are trying
to do.

But for this sort of nonsubstantive discussion, I really don't think this
list is quite the place. 

My prior postings were trying to point out the profound problems with the
Chair of the UK Council of Research Repositories arguments for taking a
"gold only route." I have no idea whatsoever whether anyone has taken any
notice of the substantive points I raised. Not one of them has been taken
up in the subsequent postings (except by Steve Hitchcock, but we already
see eye to eye). 

I really don't think, however, that a public discussion of my rigidity is
going to advance things, do you?

Best wishes,

Stevan


      Stevan Harnad wrote:

On 2010-07-30, at 4:18 PM, leo waaijers wrote:

  

Stevan Harnad wrote:
    

And my mandate, Charles (if you will permit me!) is to continue describing, as c
learly and as concretely as I can, what it is that I take to be the mandate of r
epositories, repository managers, and repository managers -- and why.
      

Is this a self-imposed mandate Stevan? If so, are we all entitled to define our
own mandates?
    

Yes, self-imposed, Leo.

And, yes, we're all entitled to impose mandates on ourselves.

(Some, unfond of extended metaphors, might prefer to call it their "mission." Mi
ne's been open access archivangelism 'lo these nigh on 20 years...)


  
Received on Sat Jul 31 2010 - 16:56:51 BST