From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2013 09:35:48 -0400

This is truly very funny.  Why did Bohannon choose fake authors'
names?  He could have used names like Suber, Harnad, and Taylor, I
suppose.  It's a humorous sting.  It's a HUMOROUS sting.  And the
sting part has had practical outcomes, as journals are removed from
lists and publishers everywhere (and not just OA publishers) are
reviewing their internal systems to make sure the next sting misses
them.  I'm expecting someone to repeat the sting with traditional
publishers just to prove the point that it's not only OA publishers
that have editorial problems.  Be on your guard, and thank Bohannon
for that.  Kudos to him.  Shame on DOAJ for not simply saying the
truth:  We screwed up.  We will do better next time.

Joe Esposito


On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 8:58 AM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Dom Mitchell <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2013 14:45:01 +0200
>
> Two weeks ago DOAJ published a brief response to the Bohannon article:
>
> http://www.doaj.org/doaj?func=news&nId=315&uiLanguage=en
>
> We promised then to come back with a second response once we had
> carried out some further analysis. We have published that response
> today:
>
> http://www.doaj.org/doaj?func=news&nId=317&uiLanguage=en
>
> In it we explain what has happened to the journals in DOAJ that
> accepted Bohannon's fake paper and we explain why we think that
> Bohannon's choice of fake author names is damaging to scholarly
> publishing.
>
> Dom Mitchell
> Community Manager, DOAJ
> Tel: +46 (0)702044095 - mob/cell
>      +44 (0)207 097 8565
> Skype: dommitchellhw