Elektrine lite

← Feed

@mattjhodgkinson@scicomm.xyz

Post #2433597

2024-03-29 10:52 UTC

@villavelius@mastodon.online @Luke_Drury@mastodon.dias.ie @johannes_lehmann@fediscience.org @brembs@mastodon.social If the aim to replace subscription journals isn't realised, refusing APCs entirely will set the clock back 20 years. Stevan Harnad's Subversive Proposal of 1994 envisaged self-archiving causing subscriptions to wither away, but without success. Beware the law of unintended consequences!

Replies (3)

  • @villavelius@mastodon.online 2024-03-29 11:02

    @mattjhodgkinson@scicomm.xyz @Luke_Drury@mastodon.dias.ie @johannes_lehmann@fediscience.org @brembs@mastodon.social I like the thought behind Plan U (https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/article?id=10.1371/journal.pbio.3000273): post #preprint first, and then submit to a journal (if that's even needed). Whether the journal is then subscription-based, APC-funded-OA, or fully subsidised 'diamond' becomes less relevant to the free and open dissemination of knowledge.

    Open ##2433598

  • @mattjhodgkinson@scicomm.xyz @villavelius@mastodon.online @Luke_Drury@mastodon.dias.ie @brembs@mastodon.social What is wrong with subscription based journals? It’s that they can hold research at ransom. They cannot if the work is uploaded to a preprint repository. Not sure what the 1994 vision of self-archiving was, but you need standardisation and indexing - the Rxiv servers do that well. Journals can still offer formatting, dissemination & review for cash - and libraries can decide how much that is worth, from a much stronger negotiation position.

    Open ##2433605

  • @brembs@mastodon.social 2024-03-29 13:02

    @mattjhodgkinson@scicomm.xyz @villavelius@mastodon.online @Luke_Drury@mastodon.dias.ie @johannes_lehmann@fediscience.org I don't understand? 20 years ago, people paid subscriptions. How is paying neither subscriptions nor APCs like 20 years ago? I'm not aware that Gates are paying subscriptions?

    Open ##2433607