From: Ari Belenkiy <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 18:04:03 -0800
Peer-review is alpha and omega of the publishing process. Its fairness
largely comes from a random choice of the referees.
If the peer-review is relegated to your own own university, this will
grossly undermine the fairness component, like - sorry for a somewhat
frivolous analogy - an inbreeding undermines the natural selection.
On Wed, Mar 2, 2016 at 3:29 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> From: "Maher, Stephen" <[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Wed, 2 Mar 2016 15:49:45 +0000
> SciHub is a problem but the short-sighted solution is taking a
> whack-a-mole approach to the copyright infringers. A holistic solution
> would look at intrinsic and monetary value of scholarly publishing and
> reassess the processes.
> What if universities (re)prioritized participation in peer-review and
> editorial ethics in its determination for faculty appointments and
> tenure? What if university presses published their own STEM journals
> akin to Law Schools and their law reviews?
> Loving this thread BTW.
> Stephen Maher, MSIS
> NYU Health Sciences Library