From: "Hamaker, Charles" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2013 01:14:23 +0000

Thomas,

I've probably done as much if not more systematic cancellation of
Elsevier content as a percentage of spend as anyone in the country.
Karen Hunter and I both agreed in the 80's to a working title for me
of "king of cancellations".

That's not the point.

 I'm not calling for cancelling Elsevier journals, I'm saying Elsevier
jumped the shark, needlessly alienated the only thing they need to
keep their well oiled machine working. i.e. the authors.

Sorry if I was not communicating clearly.
Chuck Hamaker

________________________________________

From: Thomas Krichel <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sun, 8 Dec 2013 23:52:16 +0000

Hamaker, Charles <[log in to unmask]> writes

> Elsevier and its cynical relationship with authors and institutions,
> has been demonstrated by Elsevier itself. No one could have done this
> to them but themselves.
>
> The tide of OA, of authors making sure people who need to see it,
> get to read their research, OA in all its guises, is inexorable and
> if handled correctly even by such behemoths as Elsevier, will lift
> all boats in the publishing stream, despite the scaremongers and
> naysayers in publishing, or the mistaken advice of some in
> libraries, or even among OA advocates themselves. It's logic is
> persuasive, its goals commensurate ultimately with what authors want
> for their own research. To put up and enforce barriers to what
> scholars want to distribute that they themselves produce is
> antediluvian.

You talk the talk Charles. Will you now walk the walk and cancel
your Elsevier subscriptions?

Cheers,

Thomas Krichel
http://openlib.org/home/krichel