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