But it is not a co-conspiracy -- much as conspiratorial thinking comes in handy 
at lean times when there is nothing new to talk about. 

 

So although the dupees have themselves to blame for allowing themselves to be 
duped, that does not put them on the same plane of culpability as the dupers. 
After all, it is the dupers who gain from the duping, and the dupees who lose, 
whether or not they have themselves to blame for falling for it.

 

Blaming the victim, as Richard does, below, also has a long predigree 
<http://users.ecs.soton.ac.uk/harnad/Hypermail/Amsci/0364.html>  in this Forum, 
but I will not rebut it again in detail. The short answer is that adopting 
effective Green OA mandates (rather than vilifying the victims for their 
foolishness) is the remedy for all the damage the victims have unwittingly 
allowed to be done them for so long.

 

And stop fussing about metrics. They too will sort themselves out completely 
once we have universally mandated (and provided) green OA.

 

Richard Poynder: What Jean-Claude’s criticism of large publishers like Elsevier 
and Wiley omits is the role that the research community has played in their 
rise to power, a role that it continues to play. In fact, not only has the 
research community been complicit [emphasis added] in the rise and rise of the 
publishing oligarchy that Jean-Claude so deprecates, but one could argue that 
it created it — i.e. this oligarchy is a creature of its own making. 

    After all, it is the research community that funds these publishers, it is 
the research community that submits papers to these publishers (and signs over 
copyright in the process), and it is the research community that continues to 
venerate the brands (essentially a product of the impact factor) that allow 
these publishers to earn the high profits that Jean-Claude decries.

    And by now seeking to flip this oligarchy’s journals to OA the research 
community appears to be intent on perpetuating its power (and doubtless 
profits).

    One might therefore want to suggest that Jean-Claude’s animus is 
misdirected.

 

So are Richard's reproaches.

 

Your increasingly bored archivangelist,

 

Stevan Harnad

 

 

>>> 

 

And I might be tempted to suggest that Stevan has misinterpreted what I said. 
But I am happy to let him have the last word (I would hate to be charged with 
conspiring to fuel the boredom of a bored archivangelist!)

 

_______________________________________________
GOAL mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal

Reply via email to