From: Ken Masters <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 08:50:53 +0200

[MOD NOTE: With Ken Masters having replied, below, we should
discontinue this particular piece of the thread, as it may have
outlived its productive phase.  Thank you.]

Hi All

For the record, I have disclosed this information on several
occasions.  Some examples:

1. On this list, when Beall's list was discussed, I sent a mail (10
March 2012) addressing several of his fallacies.   That mail begins
with the statement "I'm an editor of one the the journals that is
published by ISPUB, listed as a predator publisher."  Perhaps you
missed that.

2. On his blog, where I posted a similar reply to his fallacies, I
disclosed that fact also.  (As you read and contribute to his blog,
it's a pity you missed that also).

3. My signature contains the information stating that I am editor of
the journal.  It appears in every mail I have sent to this list.

Just how much more disclosure is required?

Regards

Ken

Dr. Ken Masters
Asst. Professor: Medical Informatics
Medical Education Unit
College of Medicine & Health Sciences
Sultan Qaboos University
Sultanate of Oman
E-i-C: The Internet Journal of Medical Education



On 17 July 2012 02:37, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> From: Bill Cohen <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Sun, 15 Jul 2012 19:26:26 -0400
>
> An author should, in view full disclosure, indicate when posting on
> this listserve that his own journal is published by one of the
> predatory publishers on Beall's List.
>
>
> On 7/15/12 6:35 PM, LIBLICENSE wrote:
>
> > From: Ken Masters <[log in to unmask]>
> > Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 06:56:54 +0200
> >
> > Hi All
> >
> > Prof. Beall's list must be taken with a mountain of salt, as it is
> > fraught with problems.
> >
> > For example, he makes it clear that he does NOT evaluate at the
> > journal level, only at publisher level.  How then, we should ask, does
> > he get to include independent journals on his list?  How then, does he
> > evaluate article quality?
> >
> > On the moral side, in which he attempts to take the high ground, he
> > does not disclose that he is on the editorial board of a journal
> > published by Taylor & Francis.  He has very effectively used his blog,
> > Facebook, The Chronicle,  and, inadvertently, this list, to trash the
> > competition.
> >
> > There are many other problems with his list, but far too numerous to
> > repeat on this list.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Ken
> >
> > Dr. Ken Masters
> > Asst. Professor: Medical Informatics
> > Medical Education Unit
> > College of Medicine & Health Sciences
> > Sultan Qaboos University
> > Sultanate of Oman
> > E-i-C: The Internet Journal of Medical Education
> >
> >
> >
> > On 12 July 2012 21:23, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> >> From: Richard Poynder <[log in to unmask]
> >> Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 21:01:47 +0100
> >>
> >> Jeffrey Beall, a metadata librarian at the University of Colorado
> >> Denver, maintains a list of what he calls “predatory publishers”. That
> >> is, publishers who, as Beall puts it, “unprofessionally exploit the
> >> gold open-access model for their own profit.” Amongst other things,
> >> this can mean that papers are subjected to little or no peer review
> >> before they are published.
> >>
> >> Currently, Beall’s blog list of predatory publishers lists over 100
> >> separate companies, and 38 independent journals. And the list is
> >> growing by 3 to 4 new publishers each week.
> >>
> >> Beall’s opening salvo against predatory publishers came in 2009, when
> >> he published a review of the OA publisher Bentham Open for The
> >> Charleston Advisor. Since then, he has written further articles on the
> >> topic, and has been featured twice in The Chronicle of Higher
> >> Education.
> >>
> >> His work on predatory publishers has caused Beall to become seriously
> >> concerned about the risks attached to gold OA. And he is surprised at
> >> how little attention these risks get from the research community. As
> >> he puts it, “I am dismayed that most discussions of gold open-access
> >> fail to include the quality problems I have documented. Too many OA
> >> commenters look only at the theory and ignore the practice. We must
> >> ‘maintain the integrity of the academic record’, and I am doubtful
> >> that gold open-access is the best long-term way to accomplish that.”
> >>
> >> An interview with Jeffrey Beall is available here:
> >>
> >> http://poynder.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/oa-interviews-jeffrey-beall-university.html
> >>
> >> Richard Poynder