From: "Jan Erik Frantsvåg" <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2019 06:28:52 +0000

I am sceptical. Not that I think the facts are made up, but I see no trace
of any activity to look for communication with other publishers – why only
Frontiers?



I have seen scholars saying that Plan S is perfectly suited to Frontier’s
business models, implying less suited for the business models of other
publishers. I fail to see that Frontier’s business model is uniquely suited
to Plan S, it fits most APC-based/commercial OA publishers.



Robert-Jan Smits has said that Plan S was developed partly based on
consultations with publishers. Unless someone can document Frontiers was
massively over-represented in this process, I will remain sceptical to the
value of this story.



Best,

Jan Erik



Jan Erik Frantsvåg

Open Access Adviser

The University Library

UiT The Arctic University of Norway

phone +47 77 64 49 50

e-mail [log in to unmask]

http://en.uit.no/ansatte/organisasjon/ansatte/person?p_document_id=43618&p_dimension_id=88187

Publications: http://tinyurl.com/6rycjns

http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3413-8799






From: "Jim O'Donnell" <[log in to unmask]>

Date: Thu, 11 Jul 2019 12:54:38 -0700

This came across my screen today, making me aware that I know too
little about the author of the post, the publisher involved, and the
other facts known about the origins and development of Plan S.  Is
this posting credible and how could it help me think about the plan
and the issues?

https://forbetterscience.com/2019/07/11/frontiers-and-robert-jan-smits-emails-reveal-how-plan-s-was-conceived/

Jim O'Donnell
ASU