From: Anthony Watkinson <[log in to unmask]> Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 10:03:10 +0100 I think Lisa raises an important point here. In principle it would be an excellent thing if publishers and librarians, both dedicated to facilitating research, could be involved in the governance of all such projects assuming that they are willing to help with the costs. It is possible for some projects entirely governed by publishers to gain general respect - such as CrossRef. I am trying to think of library projects of a similar type where publishers have been involved in the governance from the start. I am honoured to be a director of the Charleston Conference although I have not been a librarian since 1971 and have been a publisher for most of my life and some of my colleagues on this committee are also publishers but I cannot think of others. Clearly a conference is not like RA 21 but Charleston because of its nature does lead on to innovation and indeed it is part of its overall philosophy Anthony -----Original Message----- From: "Hinchliffe, Lisa W" <[log in to unmask]> Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2017 00:05:40 +0000 I'm not at all of the "no compromise" perspective that many librarians take. I'm firmly on record (even on video!) of the need to serve all of the principles in the library code of ethics - including both the obligation to confidentiality and the obligation to quality service. What that means in practice is of course always a continuous process of reflection, careful decision-making, etc. My concern with RA21 is, notwithstanding Nettie's very helpful posting earlier today including her hope that librarians engage, is that the steering committee includes no librarians (https://ra21.org/index.php/about/). I want to see librarians as part of the team that develops the strategy for this project and not just on implementation teams. Lisa P.S. Not my first time being disappointed in an STM initiative and how they conceptualize the role of libraries: https://www.digital-science.com/blog/perspectives/substantial-enduring-roles-libraries-article-sharing-part-2/ -- Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe Professor/ Coordinator for Information Literacy Services and Instruction University Library, University of Illinois, 1408 West Gregory Drive, Urbana, Illinois 61801 [log in to unmask], 217-333-1323 (v), 217-244-4358 (f) ________________________________________ From: Joseph Esposito <[log in to unmask]> Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2017 11:16:53 -0400 I am not sure how I feel about these issues or how to think about them. Culturally and personally I am very much in Lisa's camp, but the pragmatist in me is not so sure. First, though, let me be clear that I am not trying to defend anything the STM Association or anyone else is doing or not doing with regard to SciHub. That's a commercial issue, but Lisa is getting at something more important. What perplexes me is how to influence discussion without entering the discussion. If one's opening and foundational position is "no compromise to privacy," strong forces, political as well as commercial, will simply not engage you in conversation. Is the more prudent role, if less satisfying philosophically, to soften the tone and role up one's sleeves? I have written about this elsewhere: https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2016/06/23/libraries-may-have-gotten-the-privacy-thing-all-wrong/ I am truly perplexed by this entire issue and how to move it forward. Joe Esposito