From: leo waaijers <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, 12 Jun 2017 08:31:04 +0200

Just to confirm Jean-Claude’s experience. We also approached Beall for
a list of ISSNs of predatory journals, so that we might indicate these
journals in Quality Open Access Market like we do with DOAJ’s Seals of
Approval. He replied that he did not have such a list. Period.

Leo Waaijers


Op 11-6-2017 om 20:11 schreef LIBLICENSE:
From: "Jean-Claude Guédon" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2017 18:34:18 -0400

Beall's list could have done so much good work if he had accepted
collaborating with other, complementary, organizations, such as DOAJ.
I suggested this to him, once, but in vain. he did not even respond or
explain why he would not do such a thing.

It must never be forgotten that Beall's list never clearly
distinguished between bad publications and open access publications,
particularly if the latter did not originate with a well known,
preferably Western-based, publisher. Hindawi temporarily fell victim
to this kind of behaviour. So did the Scielo platform, once described
as publishing "favelas" by Beall. By muddying th waters as much as he
did, Beall did at least as much harm as he did good.

Jean-Claude Guidon


Le jeudi 08 juin 2017 à 20:09 -0400, LIBLICENSE a écrit :
From: Byron Russell <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2017 08:17:53 +0000

I quite agree. It was too easy (or lazy?) to see the list as being the
go-to place for information about predatory publishers, several of
whom – bona fide academic publishers – are hosted by Ingenta Connect,
which gave rise to some concern as to what exactly the compiler’s
parameters were. Like the DOAJ, we prefer to carry our own vetting
procedures when approached by new publishers seeking our hosting
services.

Byron

Byron Russell
Head of Ingenta Connect
Ingenta

Tel. +44 (0)1865 397881
Mob. +44 (0)7900 494258