Beall's list was helpful but his propensity to personally attack anyone who doesn't agree 100% with his view is not professional and continually negates his work. Extremism by either side does not advance the dialogue nor move us forward.
Michelle Kraft
Director Library Services
Cleveland Clinic Health System
Sent from my iPhone
> On Jun 16, 2017, at 1:37 AM, LIBLICENSE <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> From: Joseph Esposito <
[log in to unmask]>
> Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2017 08:06:50 -0400
>
> Thank you for this comment, Colette. It seems to me to pretty much hit
> the bullseye.
>
> Joe Esposito
>
>
>> On Wed, Jun 14, 2017 at 6:48 PM, LIBLICENSE <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>> From: Collette Mak <
[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2017 08:41:00 -0400
>>
>> thanks(!) for posting, I don't know how I missed that!
>>
>> There's no question that he comes across as a bitter, venom-spitting curmudgeon in that opinion piece but it reminded me that we do owe him a debt of gratitude for shining a spotlight on the very real issue of predatory publishers and on the potential threat to the rigor of scholarly publishing. I disagree with him (and with the excellent LSE blog on SciHub) that it's a failure of publishing. I think it's more a failure of promotion/tenure to have kept pace with a rapidly changing scholarly communications environment. If you're going to be graded on publications then people going to want to publish, Adam Smith's invisible hand is going to meet that market demand.
>>
>> Guess it's my day to be the curmudgeon and, BTW, get off my lawn
>>
>> Collette
>>
>> Collette Mak
>> Outreach and Scholarly Communications Librarian
>> Hesburgh Libraries