Current Liblicense Archive - Re: Open Science Initiative issues draft paper & recommendations

List archives since November 2011, after the list migrated to the Center for Research Libraries.


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  February 2015

LIBLICENSE-L February 2015

Subject:

Re: Open Science Initiative issues draft paper & recommendations

From:

LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

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

Date:

Mon, 16 Feb 2015 19:23:53 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (74 lines)

From: Glenn Hampson <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Mon, Feb 16, 2015 at 4:24 PM

Hi Ann, Richard Poynder was kind enough to forward me your email to
the liblicense-l listserv. I don’t subscribe to this list, so perhaps
you would be able to distribute this note as warranted.

The OSI working group was/is a group of volunteers who signed up last
fall to participate in an online conversation about the future of
scholarly publishing. We (nSCI) invited interested participants from a
number of lists in September of 2014 (though, unfortunately, not the
liblicense list---my bad), and began our online discussion in October.
The main conversation just wrapped up last month. The draft paper you
noted in your email was posted online and also circulated back to
listserv communities for review and comment. The authors and editors
are noted on the copyright page.

We had around 120 people signed up for this conversation---of whom
maybe a few dozen were active participants. I’m not sure why all
didn’t sign---it’s mostly just a lack of effort on our part to make
sure that all names were included (we’ll try again to get more names
listed before the final version is sealed). I know two people were
worried about signing due to potential conflicts of interest with
their employers. But signing doesn’t signify agreement with the
recommendations or findings---just participation in this conversation.

We had a good mix of open access supporters and critics take part in
this conversation, plus folks who are actively engaged in trying to
push the ball forward in the marketplace and figure out how to make
change work at the library level and government level. There’s enough
criticism of OA in the report to make most supporters uncomfortable,
and enough support of OA to make most critics uncomfortable. This
report is still in the comment stage, so if you think we need to make
some changes, please feel free to let me know.

I would caution against calling this a “study.” It isn’t. It’s just
the curated notes of an illuminating online conversation between some
very well-informed and interested people who operate in this space---a
conversation that grew out of the OA events of this past summer, and
the exchanges that were occurring on a few related listserv at the
time (like the scholcomm listserv, research admin listserv, and a few
others). There wasn’t a careful and deliberate effort here to first
identify and then invite all the right people.  The stakeholder
community here is so broad and deep---that task in itself will be a
research project!

As for nSCI, we’re just a small all-volunteer nonprofit charity
managing a portfolio of projects (like OSI) that are primarily focused
on improving the communication that happens inside science. We’ve been
around for about four years now. We’re not backed by anyone (other
than our members) and we don’t have an agenda, other than working for
improvement.  Our web address is nationalscience.org. Our projects are
listed at nationalscience.org/projects. I’d be happy to answer any
specific questions you might have after reviewing our website. I
apologize for opacity----it’s certainly not deliberate (our website is
overdue for a makeover), but then we’re a little bit off the beaten
path, at least right for now.

I’d be happy to discuss this effort with you, including providing more
details about the ASR effort. We’ve set up a separate listserv to deal
with conference planning discussions and ASR development issues.
Anyone interested is welcome to join----just let me know and I’ll sign
you up.

Sincerely,

Glenn Hampson
Executive Director
National Science Communication Institute (nSCI)
2320 N 137th Street
Seattle, WA 98133
(206) 417-3607
[log in to unmask]
nationalscience.org

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options



Archives

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