LIBLICENSE-L@LISTSERV.CRL.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LIBLICENSE-L Home

LIBLICENSE-L Home

LIBLICENSE-L  June 2013

LIBLICENSE-L June 2013

Subject:

Re: A forum for authors to review journals?

From:

LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

LibLicense-L Discussion Forum <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Fri, 14 Jun 2013 16:17:51 -0400

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (59 lines)

From: <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 12:35:30 +0000

The terminology of the proposal might be confusing some people.  I
gather that the idea is not to review journals per se, but their
publishers, from the perspective of the author.  I'll add that there's
a similar need for reviewing monograph publishers.

Jonathan

**************************
Jonathan H. Harwell
Head of Collections and Systems
Olin Library
Rollins College
Winter Park, FL 32789
[log in to unmask]

-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Anderson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2013 14:14:40 +0000

>Open reviews of journals would be as useful as book reviews on Amazon
>where one usually has no idea what qualifies the reviewer to express an
>opinion.

But no one is proposing "open reviews of journals" here, Sandy. The
system in question here wouldn't review works of scholarship (about
which relatively few people might be qualified to express a truly
informed opinion); it would review services provided -- i.e.
reviewing, editing, dissemination, etc. The ones qualified to comment
on the quality of the service are the ones who were provided it --
i.e., authors. I'm not a plumber, and in fact I know very little about
plumbing, but I am fully qualified to rate the quality of service my
plumber provides: Did he arrive when he said he would? Did he work
with reasonable speed and efficiency? Was the final bill reasonably
close to the original estimate?

Did he leave a mess? When he left, had the leak stopped? These are
questions that the customer, rather than a plumbing expert, is in a
position to answer, and the answers are likely to be very useful and
interesting to the plumber's other potential customers.

By the same token, any author who places a manuscript with a publisher
comes away from that experience fully qualified to comment on it. In
other words, what we're talking about here is not "open reviews of
journals,"
but open review of the way journal publishers interact with their
customers, who are, in the first instance, authors. (Such a mechanism
is especially interesting because journal publishers are vying for
authors in a conventionally competitive marketplace -- which, given
the monopolistic nature of copyright, is not true of the marketplace
for readers.)

---
Rick Anderson
Interim Dean, J. Willard Marriott Library University of Utah
[log in to unmask]

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options



Archives

December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011

RSS1