From: Laura Quilter <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 11:27:59 -0400

Seconding the below comment:  Consumer review sites can be good, or
bad, depending very much on how they are managed and run.  Given the
continual hub-bub over Jeffrey Beall's list, and the problems that can
exist with all publishers, it seems to me that a well-managed site
that solicited feedback and made consumer reviews available could be
very useful to all members of the scholarly communication community.

Speaking personally, as a partner to a scientist who has recently had
a very frustrating experience with a journal, I think she would have
loved to have been able to get some feedback on this journal before
responding to a solicitation to publish there!

----------------------------------
Laura Markstein Quilter / [log in to unmask]
Librarian, Geek, Attorney, Teacher


Copyright and Information Policy Librarian
University of Massachusetts, Amherst
[log in to unmask]

Lecturer, Simmons College, GSLIS
[log in to unmask]


On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 1:32 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Anthony Watkinson <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2013 19:51:38 +0100
>
> Anyone who taught in a university is aware that such evaluations can be very
> useful. It is not difficult to pick out the malcontents and people who just
> want to cause problems, annoying though these are.
>
> All or at least most publishers crave feedback. That is one of the reasons
> they hold expensive editorial board meetings. BioMed Central answer all
> complaints about their journals at a senior management level on a particular
> afternoon every week. When I was a publisher for a list of journals I always
> replied to any complaints that reached me at once and instigated an enquiry.
> BMC make sure that complaints always reach senior people. It is not in the
> interest of publishers dependent on good relations with the academic
> community if they are to discourage evaluation.
>
> It seems to me that the problem will be who runs the site. If it someone
> like our moderator everyone except some very extreme people will be happy.
> If it is a single person like Jeffrey Beall it is good if, like Jeffrey,
> they strive to be fair. If it is someone who has vendetta against publishers
> in general or particular publishers what good will the site do? I am not
> sure how many people will have seen the formal evaluations of The Charleston
> Advisor of online electronic resources. The reviews of services and products
> in TCA are scrutinised by a varied editorial board quite carefully
> [admission - I am one of them]. I am not suggesting something formal like
> this - it is one extreme of what is possible. The big problem is of course
> how to make such a venture sustainable. I am sure Ann could tell us the
> amount of work involved.
>
> Anthony