Post #2433634

2024-03-30 11:45 UTC

@brembs@mastodon.social @mike@sauropods.win @villavelius@mastodon.online @Luke_Drury@mastodon.dias.ie @johannes_lehmann@fediscience.org Simplistic sweeping statements don't get effective change. The negative framing of calls for reform may be a problem - everyone can see you're against APCs and subscriptions, and pre-publication peer review, but you need to have a clearly-stated positive vision that takes institutions and researchers with you to a sustainable alternative. Gates have jumped the gun by not having that articulated.

Replies (3)

@mattjhodgkinson@scicomm.xyz 2024-03-30 11:53

@brembs@mastodon.social @mike@sauropods.win @villavelius@mastodon.online @Luke_Drury@mastodon.dias.ie @johannes_lehmann@fediscience.org There are numerous stumbling blocks to work out: - How will publisher back catalogues be accessed? - How will funders enact this reform in fields and regions which they don't fund so have no sway over? - Will institutions and researchers acquiesce to funder diktats? - Big publishers may react by withdrawing cooperation: disallowing prior preprinting and self-archiving, withdrawing from free access schemes. System inertia may favour them.

Open ##2433635
@mike@sauropods.win 2024-03-30 12:27

@mattjhodgkinson@scicomm.xyz @brembs@mastodon.social @villavelius@mastodon.online @Luke_Drury@mastodon.dias.ie @johannes_lehmann@fediscience.org I am sympathetic to that analysis. I like the Gates announcement, but would have liked it more if it had led with "here's what we're going to do".

Open ##2433643
@brembs@mastodon.social 2024-03-31 10:39

@mattjhodgkinson@scicomm.xyz @mike@sauropods.win @villavelius@mastodon.online @Luke_Drury@mastodon.dias.ie @johannes_lehmann@fediscience.org I don't see how Gates have jumped any gun. As we try to emphasize in the post, Gates are just implementing a growing consensus that covers not only a large number of scholalry organizations, but also funders and even science minsters.

Open ##2433644