RE: Critique of J-C Guedon's Serials Review article on Open Access

["David Goodman" <David.Goodman@liu.edu>]

Speaking personally, I did not read jcg's article the same way that Stevan
did. Most of the paper is devoted to a discussion of the various plans,
Stevan's included. I cannot argue jcg's case anywhere near as effectively
as he can himself, nor have I as elegantly incisive a style. To both
evaluate the appropriateness of the criticism and enjoy his writing, read
his paper, as cited.

At the end of the paper, on 2 of his 14 pages, jcg succumbs to the
not-uncommon temptation to put forth a plan of his own, not as I
understand it to be used instead of Green and Gold OA, but to be used
subsequently, to establish a different and better scientific communication
system.

Like any new plan it needs discussion;, and Stevan has begun. I am not
sure enough yet about what is intended to join in, but I suspect the plan
might work best if seen as a part of a drastically altered system of
higher education and research funding.

I am grateful to jcg for the exposure to his expanded vision.

Dr. David Goodman
Associate Professor
Palmer School of Library and Information Science
Long Island University
dgoodman@liu.edu

for efficiency, I post to one list, but others may link or copy.

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu on behalf of Stevan Harnad
Sent: Wed 12/29/2004 10:27 PM
To: BOAI Forum
Subject: Critique of J-C Guedon's Serials Review article on Open Access

            ** Apologies for Cross-Posting **

I have written a critique of Jean-Claude Guedon's recent Serials Review
article:

    The "Green" and "Gold" Roads to Open Access:
    The Case for Mixing and Matching
    Jean-Claude Guedon, Serials Review 30(4) 2004
    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00987913

My critique is entitled:

    Fast-Forward on the Green Road to Open Access:
    The Case Against Mixing Up Green and Gold

Its full text is at:=20

    http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Temp/mixcrit.htm

(There is also a full-context version of the critique that quotes J-CG's
article in entirety: =
http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~harnad/Temp/mixcritcont.htm )

Comments are welcome -- preferably posted to:
    american-scientist-open-access-forum@amsci.org

Here is a summary from the Introduction to my critique:

Open Access (OA) means: free online access to all peer-reviewed journal
articles.

Jean-Claude Guedon (J-CG) argues against the efficacy of author
self-archiving of peer-reviewed journal articles -- the "Green" road to OA
-- on the grounds (1) that far too few authors self-archive, (2) that
self-archiving can only generate incomplete and inconvenient access, and
(3) that maximizing access and impact is the wrong = reason for seeking OA
(and only favors elite authors). J-CG suggests instead that the right
reason for seeking OA is so as to reform the journal publishing system by
converting it to OA ("Gold") publishing (in which the online version of
all articles is free to all users). He proposes converting to Gold by
"mixing and matching" Green and Gold as follows:

    First, self-archive dissertations (not published, peer-reviewed
    journal articles).  Second, identify and tag how those dissertations
    have been evaluated and reviewed.  Third, self-archive unrefereed
    preprints (not published, peer-reviewed journal articles). Fourth,
    develop new mechanisms for evaluating and reviewing those unrefereed
    preprints, at multiple levels. The result will be OA Publishing
    (Gold).

...

Stevan Harnad