From: Ken Masters <[log in to unmask]> Date: Mon, 18 Feb 2013 08:19:36 +0400 Joe: "Gold OA, in other words, structurally requires lower editorial standards. Much of the time we may not care about that, but then you stumble on one simple error and begin to reflect on the entire enterprise." And is that really fair at all? After finding a factual error in one paper, we begin to reflect on the quality of the paper, yes, but on the entire journal? On the entire publisher? On the entire publishing model? Imagine if we applied that same standard to a paper published by a non-open access publisher. After finding a factual error (or a fraudulent reference, or a straight-forward lie, or similar), in a non-open access journal paper, would it be fair to reflect upon the model of non-open access publishing, and charging for accessing that journal? (And would that qualify as "criminal?") If we did, how many publishers would exist right now? A starting point might be to reflect upon our application of standards and demands, ensuring that they are equitable. Regards Ken Dr. Ken Masters Asst. Professor: Medical Informatics Medical Education Unit College of Medicine & Health Sciences Sultan Qaboos University Sultanate of Oman E-i-C: The Internet Journal of Medical Education