From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 19:55:19 -0700

It is quite surprising that such a service does not already exist.
You can go online to post comments, positive and negative, about
United Airlines and AT&T.  Why not journals?  Or for that matter, why
not funding agencies and universities?

Joe Esposito


On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 2:48 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Jean-Claude Guédon <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 18:06:48 -0400
>
> This is obviously an excellent suggestion. Any "panoptic" opportunity
> on such a complex situation can only be useful.
>
> Thematic tagging and keywords by publisher would help retrieve
> patterns and trends.
>
> Jean-Claude Guédon
>
>
> Le mardi 04 juin 2013 à 17:25 -0400, LIBLICENSE a écrit :
> From: Kevin Smith <[log in to unmask]
> Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 11:47:15 +0000
>
> In light of this conversation about criticism of various publishing
> practices and what should count as evidence, I wonder how list members
> feel about the suggestion made in this blog post that a forum should
> be created for academic authors to recount both their positive and
> negative experiences with specific journals:
>
> http://bit.ly/YP9X3y
>
> It seems to me that this idea offers several advantages.  It would
> provide a broader perspective than any blog written by a single
>
> person, it would focus on the criteria that actually matter to
> authors, and it would offer an opportunity to both condemn or praise
> the practices of specific publishers.  It would offer the rest of us
> the opportunity to really learn which publishers are "extracting money
> from the system of scholarly communications while providing no
> significant service in return" from the point of view of those who
> expect to benefit from those services.
>
> Kevin
>
> Kevin L. Smith, M.L.S., J.D.
> Director, Copyright and Scholarly Communication
> Duke University Libraries
> Durham, NC  27708
> [log in to unmask]