[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: practical solution
- To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Subject: Re: practical solution
- From: David Goodman <dgoodman@Princeton.EDU>
- Date: Wed, 5 Jul 2006 19:31:52 EDT
- Reply-to: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
- Sender: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
Dear mark, There are always more left. There is always one of borderline relevance. When advanageous, I was certainly prepared to make an argument that it was impossible, but I doubt even the dean believed it. The benefit /cost ratio of any libraries' periodical list is a continuum. There is no sharp break between those to cancel and those to keep. One goes from the bottom, cancelling until the necessary money has been saved. Yes, of those I cancelled when I was a selector maybe 1/2 would have been kept with abundant money, but I always had a list ready for next year. There is **always** one still at the bottom. Dr. David Goodman Associate Professor Palmer School of Library and Information Science Long Island University and formerly Princeton University Library dgoodman@liu.edu dgoodman@princeton.edu ----- Original Message ----- From: Mark Funk <mefunk@med.cornell.edu> Date: Tuesday, July 4, 2006 7:58 pm Subject: Re: practical solution To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu > At 12:01 AM -0400 7/1/06, David Goodman wrote: > >>Rather, the reasonable suggestion is that money from the >>no-longer-necessary journal subscriptions be used to help pay >>for OA fees--but not directly by the library. > > <snip> > >>Librarians could right now cancel their most expensive (and not >>cost-effective) subscriptions for 2007, regardless of >>tradition; they could then inform the provost that they would >>like to apply about half this money to help faculty pay author >>fees, and would she please distribute the money. (explaining >>that the other half will be used for long-standing library >>needs that he's been asking her to fund for years, and will no >>longer have to ask.) > > Most libraries cancelled their "expensive and not > cost-effective" journals years ago. There are no more > "no-longer-necessary" journals left to cancel. Cancelling > titles nowadays means losing titles our users want and need. To > use this money to then pay for "Open Choice" publishing is like > robbing five or six Peters to pay one Paul. > > Mark Funk > Head, Collection Development > Weill Cornell Medical Library > New York, NY 10021 > mefunk@med.cornell.edu
- Prev by Date: Re: Forthcoming OA Developments in France
- Next by Date: Cambridge University Press Acquires CABI Journals
- Previous by thread: Re: practical solution
- Next by thread: Google Wins in Germany
- Index(es):