RE: Orphans, etc.

[Sandy Thatcher <sandy.thatcher@alumni.princeton.edu>]

I think it's a good idea, too, but i would urge that books be 
chosen that more obviously and directly address issues of 
interest to people subscribed to this list. One such new book 
(which i am currently reviewing for the Journal of Scholarly 
Publishing) is Kathleen Fitzpatrick's "Planned Obsolescence" (NYU 
Press, 2011):

http://www.plannedobsolescence.net/kathleen-fitzpatrick/

It would actually be quite appropriate to offer this book for 
"post-publication" crowd review because the manuscript was posted 
for pre-publication crowd review as an experiment, given that one 
of its main topics is the need to change how peer review works.

Sandy Thatcher


>I'm in.  How do you want to organize it?
>
>Scott
>T. Scott Plutchak
>Director, Lister Hill Library of the Health Sciences
>University of Alabama at Birmingham
>tscott@uab.edu
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
>[mailto:owner-liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Joseph
>Esposito
>Sent: Friday, November 04, 2011 8:21 PM
>To: liblicense-l@lists.yale.edu
>Subject: Re: Orphans, etc.
>
>We could help to resolve a great number of disputes on this list 
>if we were to participate in a Liblicense Reading Group in which 
>we attempted to find titles to read together that would appeal 
>to a broad number of listmembers.  I think we would find great 
>congruence in sensibility among people who argue vigorously with 
>one another about other issues.  Why focus on what we disagree 
>on rather than on those things where we speak with one mind?
>
>My first nominee is "A Novel Bookstore" (fiction) by Laurence 
>Cosse, published by Europa Editions.
>
>Joe Esposito