From: Kevin Smith <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2013 13:23:08 +0000
I appreciate the responses about this idea, which I have to emphasize
was not mine at all. I took it from the blog post I circulated, and I
think it has been suggested before. I am just trying to get an idea
of the issues and likely reception, preliminary to even thinking about
whether it is something I should encourage others to support and
facilitate.
As Joe points out, lots of business are the subject of dedicated
review forums, even including physicians (who are a bit sensitive
about it). And there is, actually, at least one site for students to
post reviews about universities at studentsreview.com.
Ken raises directly the question of whether authors would be willing
to comment honestly or whether the power publishers have over academic
careers would have a chilling effect, while others suggest the issue
of how to keep the focus on serious comments. As to the latter, it
would probably be impossible to entirely exclude irrelevancies and
foolishness, but limiting contributions to those with a .edu e-mail
might help some. The former question is more troubling. I wonder if
the increasing diversity of options that authors have might reduce
that chilling effect to some degree; it is already the case that one
can find remarkably un-chilled comments about some publishers in
online forums. Registration, accompanied by anonymity for the actual
remarks might be a solution, but I admit that I have an instinctive
dislike and distrust of anonymous comments.
And should publishers be able to reply, the way restaurants and hotels
can respond on Yelp or Travelocity? I just don't know if that would
be helpful or would degenerate into "he said, she said."
Anyway, the discussion is interesting and very helpful, IMO. Thanks.
Kevin L. Smith, M.L.S., J.D.
Director, Copyright and Scholarly Communication
Duke University Libraries
Durham, NC 27708
[log in to unmask]
-----Original Message-----
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]
|
