From: Jennifer Howard <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 13:40:10 +0000

Hi all,

My understanding is that the conversations that led to SHARE have been
in the works for a while, although the specific proposal came together
quickly.

Cheers,

Jennifer

Jennifer Howard
Senior Reporter
CHE

-----Original Message-----
From: Anthony Watkinson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2013 10:22:52 +0100

I know nothing about this and as you know Jim there are lots of things
I know nothing about BUT my guess is that in most cases where a
declaration from a group of bodies is seen as a response it is almost
always a parallel announcement. It just takes time to get a buy-in.  I
can give an example from personal experience. If an organisation like
STM makes a response which appears to be a quick reaction to something
announced by the ARL you can be almost certain that it is parallel.
Getting a group of publishers to agree to any statement representing
them as a body requires serious consultation and I would imagine that
John Vaughn will have had to do some lobbying to get an internal
consensus within his organisation - and he does not have to worry
about anti-trust!

-----Original Message-----
From: T Scott Plutchak <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 21:43:02 +0000

Parallel, I think, rather than in response to.

Scott

T. Scott Plutchak
Director, Lister Hill Library of the Health Sciences University of
Alabama at Birmingham [log in to unmask]


-----Original Message-----
From: Jim O'Donnell <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2013 06:07:12 +0200

AAU, ARL, and APGLU together.  Article seems outside paywall.  A
response to the publishers' CHORUS proposal?

http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/universities-and-libraries-envision-a
-federated-system-for-public-access-to-research/44147

Jim O'Donnell
Georgetown