From: Laura Quilter <[log in to unmask]> Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 11:27:59 -0400 Seconding the below comment: Consumer review sites can be good, or bad, depending very much on how they are managed and run. Given the continual hub-bub over Jeffrey Beall's list, and the problems that can exist with all publishers, it seems to me that a well-managed site that solicited feedback and made consumer reviews available could be very useful to all members of the scholarly communication community. Speaking personally, as a partner to a scientist who has recently had a very frustrating experience with a journal, I think she would have loved to have been able to get some feedback on this journal before responding to a solicitation to publish there! ---------------------------------- Laura Markstein Quilter / [log in to unmask] Librarian, Geek, Attorney, Teacher Copyright and Information Policy Librarian University of Massachusetts, Amherst [log in to unmask] Lecturer, Simmons College, GSLIS [log in to unmask] On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 1:32 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > From: Anthony Watkinson <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Sat, 8 Jun 2013 19:51:38 +0100 > > Anyone who taught in a university is aware that such evaluations can be very > useful. It is not difficult to pick out the malcontents and people who just > want to cause problems, annoying though these are. > > All or at least most publishers crave feedback. That is one of the reasons > they hold expensive editorial board meetings. BioMed Central answer all > complaints about their journals at a senior management level on a particular > afternoon every week. When I was a publisher for a list of journals I always > replied to any complaints that reached me at once and instigated an enquiry. > BMC make sure that complaints always reach senior people. It is not in the > interest of publishers dependent on good relations with the academic > community if they are to discourage evaluation. > > It seems to me that the problem will be who runs the site. If it someone > like our moderator everyone except some very extreme people will be happy. > If it is a single person like Jeffrey Beall it is good if, like Jeffrey, > they strive to be fair. If it is someone who has vendetta against publishers > in general or particular publishers what good will the site do? I am not > sure how many people will have seen the formal evaluations of The Charleston > Advisor of online electronic resources. The reviews of services and products > in TCA are scrutinised by a varied editorial board quite carefully > [admission - I am one of them]. I am not suggesting something formal like > this - it is one extreme of what is possible. The big problem is of course > how to make such a venture sustainable. I am sure Ann could tell us the > amount of work involved. > > Anthony