David Chemouil | 29 Jan 13:04 2012
Picon

Re: Gowers petition against Elsevier

[ Note from moderator: While interesting, this thread is off-topic and 
list policy does not allow for discussion. Posts sent after tomorrow will 
not be forwarded. Thanks. ]

Dear colleagues,

although this petition may be useful, I think there is much more to be 
done here.

For the time being, it is quite difficult to boycott any commercial 
publisher unless you are an experienced sommité in your domain. For 
instance, PhD students need to publish in highly-rated journals or 
conferences, which are almost always associated to a publisher like 
Elsevier or Springer. To fight this situation, and as in the case of the 
free software movement, the best strategy is in my view to develop a 
high-quality alternative to commercial scientific publishing. For 
instance, the said sommités could join (or create) programme and editing 
committees of journals and conferences publishing only under a 
totally-open access scheme (i.e gratis for authors and readers, as well 
as under a "free" licence, such as the Creative Commons - Attribution - 
Share-Alike licence). As a matter of fact, as most know, this is already 
the case with publications such as TAC or LMCS and with conferences 
relying on the EPTCS proceedings. Besides, it is easy to setup a site as 
an ArXiv overlay to rely on the long-lastingness of this publication 
platform. In ten years or so, with such committees and a good editing 
policy, such journals or conferences will be as well ranked as 
commercial ones.

However the subscription to the Elsevier or Springer electronic library 
will be needed for a long time, just to be able to get digitized 
(Continue reading)

Robert Seely | 29 Jan 21:32 2012
Picon

Re: Gowers petition against Elsevier

> [ Note from moderator: While interesting, this thread is off-topic and
> list policy does not allow for discussion. Posts sent after tomorrow will
> not be forwarded. Thanks. ]

Indeed - for the most part, discussion on this list does seem to be
preaching to the choir.  Thanks in large part to the efforts of the
moderator of this list (and others), the categorical community is well
placed online - TAC, this list, arXive, nLab, and many many homepages.
It's rare (in my experience, at least) to look for a paper one wants,
and not to find it online.

SO: to all those out there who are in a position of some influence,
your task, should you choose to accept it, is to "move" deans (and
tenure committees, hiring committees, promotion committees, etc) to
accept on-line journal publications, to encourage other "independant"
journals (such as those published by professional associations) to
flourish, to establish new quality journals (sponsored by
universities, eg), to decouple the notions of "impact" (as measured by
indices) and "excellence", and whatever other measures that might
dislodge the seeming monopoly of the big 2 (3?) publishers.  Everyone
would benefit (except those publishers), so the trick is to convince
others, beyond this small community, of that.

We've had this discussion many times before - it'd be nice if the next
time we do, things have measurably improved ...

-= rags =-

--

-- 
<rags <at> math.mcgill.ca>
(Continue reading)

Joyal, André | 29 Jan 20:12 2012
Picon

discussing journals

Dear collegues,

The International Mathematical Union has a blog
for dicussing mathematical journals: 

http://blog.mathunion.org/journals/

The discussion can be continued there.

Best,
André

-------- Message d'origine--------
De: David Chemouil [mailto:David.Chemouil <at> onera.fr]
Date: dim. 29/01/2012 07:04
À: categories <at> mta.ca
Objet : categories: Re: Gowers petition against Elsevier

[Note from moderator: While interesting, this thread is off-topic and 
list policy does not allow for discussion. Posts sent after tomorrow will 
not be forwarded. Thanks. ]

[For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]

FEJ Linton | 4 Feb 21:37 2012

Re: discussing journals

[ For information only; no discussion please ]

Following up on what André Joyal wrote recently:

The Economist's latest issue (2012 Feb. 04, pp. 82-83) discusses Gowers'
blog and the resultant pledge/petition -- cf.:

http://www.economist.com/node/21545974  = and =
http://www.economist.com/node/21545974/comments .

Cheers, -- Fred

[For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]

Joyal, André | 9 Feb 03:15 2012
Picon

the IMU president signed

Information:

Ingrid Daubechies, president of the International Mathematical Union (IMU)
has signed the boycott "the cost of knowledge".

-André

[For admin and other information see: http://www.mta.ca/~cat-dist/ ]

David Roberts | 30 Jan 02:18 2012
Picon
Picon

Re: Gowers petition against Elsevier

Bearing the following moderator note in mind, I am happy to discuss
off-list the contents of my email, and please direct any replies
directly to me (and others you wish to include). I thank the moderator
for his tolerance of this extremely off-topic post, and the TAC
editors for giving us a quality free journal to publish in.

> [ Note from moderator: While interesting, this thread is off-topic and list
> policy does not allow for discussion. Posts sent after tomorrow will not be
> forwarded. Thanks. ]

One thing that people can do is be creatively subversive. For example,
when publishing in a journal owned by someone you would rather
boycott, but can't for various reasons, place the paper on the arXiv
in a generic style (e.g. amsart.sty instead of elsevier_generic.sty if
such a thing exists), as you are allowed to do (yes, you are), and
then put in a sentence "A[n essentially identical] copy of this paper
is available [for free] from arxiv.org" at the end of your abstract.

Or perhaps one can thank, in the acknowledgements, "Tim Gowers [1] and
Terry Tao [2] for their interesting remarks", and reference their
recent blog posts:

[1] http://gowers.wordpress.com/2012/01/23/httpthecostofknowledge-com/
[2] http://terrytao.wordpress.com/2012/01/26/the-cost-of-knowledge/

This might need to be followed up with a sentence expressing agreement
with their views, but the impracticality of following through on their
suggestions at present. Nice, neutral sentences: if one doesn't look
at the actual blog posts.

(Continue reading)


Gmane