RE: preserving liblicense?

["Sloan, Bernie" <bernies@uillinois.edu>]

Heather,

I'd encourage you to try out the liblicense archive site:

http://www.library.yale.edu/~llicense/ListArchives/

Bernie Sloan

-----Original Message-----
[mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of heatherm@eln.bc.ca
Sent: Thursday, January 20, 2005 6:27 PM
To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Subject: preserving liblicense?

[MOD. NOTE:  Happily, liblicense-l discussions are archived in more than
one way and site at Yale, and the LIBLICENSE web site has a mirror
overseas as well -- so this is one thing none of us has to worry about,
though the sentiments are appreciated!]

At the Charleston conference last November, Stanford University's Michael
Keller talked about some of the likely future roles for libraries.  One
possibility is the need to preserve different kinds of collections, within
their context. For example, Stanford has a collection of computer games.

Proper preservation includes maintaining the software and hardware needed
to run the games.

Electronic information, too, will need to be preserved within its context.

I have been thinking about this, and wondering:  what about listservs like
Liblicense?  As a frequent contributor over the years, I feel that some of
my very best writing has been on this list, and I would not mind having a
copy of this body of work.  The trouble is, while there are a few of my
messages that stand alone, a very great many more are only meaningful
within the context of the discussion within which they took place.

Given the controversies that have come up on this list, whether you see my
writings as valuable or not probably depends on which side of the fence
you site.  It seems likely, though, that there are many messages which
could be seen as valuable.  For example, when David Goodman first brought
up the idea that OA could be funded through library budgets much as
subscriptions are now.  Some readers will disagree with this, while I see
this as one very likely, and very doable solution to the question of
funding open access.  For others, it could be Peter Banks' latest efforts
to bring up the OA will cause government interference argument posted
earlier today.  Much as I appreciate having Peter contribute to the
discussion, as I'm sure others do for different reason, to me this is a
ludicrous idea.  If the government is funding your OA publication, it's
likely because they are funding your research and/or your entire
institution.  The amount of funding that would be needed for publication
is extremely tiny compared to either of these, and it's just silly to
think that such a small amount would be a locus of control.  Not to
mention that OA is, of essence, difficult to control. An author can post a
preprint as well as a postprint.  Copies can be kept in many locations,
making censorship impractical.

To return to my point, there are listservs - such as liblicense, the SPARC
Open Access Forum, and the American Scientist Open Access Forum, to
mention a few - which are, to me, of lasting value.  What role might
libraries play in preserving this kind of information and making it
readily accessible over the long term? Would they become a part of the
institutional repository of the host institution, for example?

Thoughts?

Heather Morrison
BC Electronic Library Network
heatherm@eln.bc.ca