From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]> Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 19:55:19 -0700 It is quite surprising that such a service does not already exist. You can go online to post comments, positive and negative, about United Airlines and AT&T. Why not journals? Or for that matter, why not funding agencies and universities? Joe Esposito On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 2:48 PM, LIBLICENSE <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > > From: Jean-Claude Guédon <[log in to unmask]> > Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 18:06:48 -0400 > > This is obviously an excellent suggestion. Any "panoptic" opportunity > on such a complex situation can only be useful. > > Thematic tagging and keywords by publisher would help retrieve > patterns and trends. > > Jean-Claude Guédon > > > Le mardi 04 juin 2013 à 17:25 -0400, LIBLICENSE a écrit : > From: Kevin Smith <[log in to unmask] > Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 11:47:15 +0000 > > In light of this conversation about criticism of various publishing > practices and what should count as evidence, I wonder how list members > feel about the suggestion made in this blog post that a forum should > be created for academic authors to recount both their positive and > negative experiences with specific journals: > > http://bit.ly/YP9X3y > > It seems to me that this idea offers several advantages. It would > provide a broader perspective than any blog written by a single > > person, it would focus on the criteria that actually matter to > authors, and it would offer an opportunity to both condemn or praise > the practices of specific publishers. It would offer the rest of us > the opportunity to really learn which publishers are "extracting money > from the system of scholarly communications while providing no > significant service in return" from the point of view of those who > expect to benefit from those services. > > Kevin > > Kevin L. Smith, M.L.S., J.D. > Director, Copyright and Scholarly Communication > Duke University Libraries > Durham, NC 27708 > [log in to unmask]