Re: 2nd Nordic Conference on Scholarly Communication .agendas/Watkinson

["Anthony Watkinson" <anthony.watkinson@btopenworld.com>]

Dear Colin

I cannot come to Lund because I have other commitments but I am referring
to the speakers - not those in attendance. To my mind it is an unbalanced
programme and yes I have made my views clear some months ago to someone
associated with the Conference. The Oxford Fiesole meeting was a
Charleston Retreat. Charleston meetings allow and indeed encourage a full
range of ideas. It was great that you were able to put your views forward
in your keynote at the meeting you referred to. It was also good to see
you again. To my mind it is one of the strengths of Charleston meetings
but as I have been involved in organising Retreats I have obviously got to
declare an interest. You will find that all open publishing meeting and
most closed ones have active OA speakers.

Anthony

----- Original Message -----
From: "Colin Steele" <Colin.Steele@anu.edu.au>
To: <liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 3:15 AM
Subject: RE: 2nd Nordic Conference on Scholarly Communication
.agendas/Watkinson

As the first invited speaker in Lund I am certainly not aware of any
hidden/special agenda. In an 'holistic' approach to scholarly
communication many of the issues are debates that need to be addressed
within the scholarly community themselves and this has arguably happened
only in fragmented fashion to date.I am certainly aware of academic
practices in relation to commercial publishing and, as Anthony knows,
Michael Mabe of Elsevier forcefully put the Elsevier view via their author
study at the Fiesole conference in Oxford last July! Anthony should come
to Lund to discuss perceived imbalances?  Regards Colin

--------------------------------------------------------------
Colin Steele. Emeritus Fellow
Email: colin.steele@anu.edu.au