From: Ari Belenkiy <[log in to unmask]> Date: Thu, 3 Mar 2016 18:04:03 -0800 Stephen, 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. Ari Belenkiy Vancouver BC 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