From: Ken Masters <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 08:19:36 +0400

Joe:

"Gold OA, in other words, structurally requires lower editorial
standards.  Much of the time we may not care about that, but then you
stumble on one simple error and begin to reflect on the entire
enterprise."

And is that really fair at all?  After finding a factual error in one
paper, we begin to reflect on the quality of the paper, yes, but on
the entire journal?  On the entire publisher?  On the entire
publishing model?  Imagine if we applied that same standard to a paper
published by a non-open access publisher.  After finding a factual
error (or a fraudulent reference, or a straight-forward lie, or
similar), in a non-open access journal paper, would it be fair to
reflect upon the model of non-open access publishing, and charging for
accessing that journal?   (And would that qualify as "criminal?")  If
we did, how many publishers would exist right now?

A starting point might be to reflect upon our application of standards
and demands, ensuring that they are equitable.

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