Post #2433645
2024-03-31 10:40 UTC
@mattjhodgkinson@scicomm.xyz @mike@sauropods.win @villavelius@mastodon.online @Luke_Drury@mastodon.dias.ie @johannes_lehmann@fediscience.org
Every organization is also stating clearly the positive vision, e.g.:
"interoperable, not-for-profit infrastructures for publishing based on open source software and open standards, in order to avoid the lock-in of services as well as proprietary systems"
We also already have sustainable alternatives, as e.g., COAR has also clearly stated:
https://www.coar-repositories.org/news-updates/coar-welcomes-the-council-of-eu-conclusions-on-high-quality-transparent-open-trustworthy-and-equitable-scholarly-publishing/
Replies (1)
-
@brembs@mastodon.social 2024-03-31 10:45
@mattjhodgkinson@scicomm.xyz @mike@sauropods.win @villavelius@mastodon.online @Luke_Drury@mastodon.dias.ie @johannes_lehmann@fediscience.org So, from my perspective, nothing of what you state in that post I repied to actually holds water. From where I stand, given the clear contradictions between what you claim and what these numerous organizations have actually publshed, it seems you are trying to misconstrue their intent, policy and vision. I cannot begin to speculate why you would want to paint such a false picture?