The site looks so ,well,….phony and kitsch !!!! Anybody falling for this kind of shenanigans is either stupid or dishonnest !!!!
Comment on Introduction to “Super Closed Access Journals” by Samir Hachani
↧
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Sajib
About Scientific Online Journal (SOP), not much experiences were shared by people including authors & reviewers. I wonder if the list shown here on the Predatory Journals is well justified! I Meanwhile, was bit happier when I got an offer yesterday through an email of SOP containg information such as, among others,
” As a new Open Access publisher, Scientific Online Journal (SOP), dedicates to providing high quality publishing services for authors. From 01/04/2014 to 30/04/2014, all your submission will be reviewed, formatted, proofread and published without any fees. It’s totally FREE.”
Truely, there were very few reasons that could make me feel wrong about SOP, yet I did feel and came across this blog ultimately; worthy to be here, aint it?
Adios!
↧
Comment on Would You Submit a Paper to This Publisher? by Smith and Franklin Academic Publishing Corporation, UK
Dear Moose: This is first ever comments from S&F to this post. Please note that one article in Current Issue was just placed to see how it looks on public domain. Same is the case for HTML and other ugly text, we apologise for this. There is no Issue published from this journal via S&F so far. The journal has been running since 2007 as independent journal and is currently in transit to SandF platform. Once completed all the text and appearance will be fine. We clear mentioned that there is not article processing charges: http://smithandfranklin.com/contents/about-us
Your comment “The editor board reveals an Islamic coalition” is not really fair, I think.
↧
Comment on Would You Submit a Paper to This Publisher? by Smith and Franklin Academic Publishing Corporation, UK
Dear Louella, Thanks for your comment but please clarify if you have received this invitation from Smith and Franklin or from somewhere else?
↧
Comment on Introduction to “Super Closed Access Journals” by Jon
The moving flames and bouncing balls on the site seem to be somewhat of a giveaway regarding the site’s integrity – or should at least arouse suspicion. It feels like a layperson’s impression of what a scholarly or research journal website should look like (I’m reminded of popular TV shows that portray a scholarly journal publication as including a smiling photo of the author sitting in his or her lab, pointing to equipment)
↧
↧
Comment on Would You Submit a Paper to This Publisher? by Smith and Franklin Academic Publishing Corporation, UK
Dear Jeff, thanks for your understanding and these points are encouraging for us.
Dear Moose, I think you should spend a little more time searching us before making any solid comments, we would appreciate that. You said about ISSN, so far, we only have published one issue (under Current Issue heading) for Science, Religion and Culture and it has got ISSN, mentioned on its home page.
You probably don’t know, to have ISSN for a journal in UK, you have to successfully publish one Issue. Therefore as we proceed with the publications process we will certainly keep every journal assigning ISSN. Thanks
↧
Comment on Spam from Predatory Open Access Publishers is Dominating my Inbox by Lisa
The same thing happened to me. It is so annoying that they keep sending me emails. Thank you for posting the article it saved my day and my money too.
↧
Comment on Would You Submit a Paper to This Publisher? by Smith and Franklin Academic Publishing Corporation, UK
Dear all,
Thanks for your time and comments. We really appreciate and respect this forum, kindly led by Jeffrey, because it’s worth considering. Certainly, we are not very happy with this post; however, we take this as an opportunity to underpin our weaknesses and to improve our services to the scientific community. Therefore, we request you to please take a look of our responses and give us your honest feedback. Please note that we are just 7 months old and can’t be compared directly with Nature or Oxford Journals. However, we are committed to scientific excellence and can assure you that we are legit.
Below are our 5 responses to these 5 questions raised here. You are welcome to ask any question in this matter because we believe in Openness in Open Access and we follow it.
1-As Jeffrey himself said, “I understand that companies can use any names they choose”, so as do we, like any other. Can you criticize on the choice of names? For example if we ask “Adrian Smith” why are you not Mikael Gill or other way around.
2- We have previously mentioned Jeffrey that we took a third party service for handling our post which reduces our cost significantly. Anyone in the world is welcome to confirm our existence using official British Company House website with following information and if have any doubt, please let us know.
Link: http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk//wcframe?name=accessCompanyInfo
Company Name: SMITH AND FRANKLIN ACADEMIC PUBLISHING CORPORATION LTD
Or
Company number: 08492932
(After filling this information, click on Search and then SandF page)
When the company website and online submission system (eSubmit) was initiated, the founder was based in Sweden, therefore the domain was registered in Sweden. Anyone who know abc of website engineering knows that domain and hosting can be registered anywhere in the world where you get best services. We are missing the point of “Predatory” publishers here; does anyone think it matters for the authors where the publisher’s domain is registered when we know the domain is usually registered with third party?
Anyways for your clarification, our domain was registered with founder name that is now based in UK so as the domain. Our domain, hosting and cloud backup (every day backup) is provided by HostGator, which is one of the responsible and reputable hosting services in the market. All our articles, in all formats, are backed up offline, beside cloud backup, at two different places. If anyone need more information, you are welcome to ask.
3-Regarding comment about Business Model, we do believe that we will stain it and sustain it way better than charging Article Processing Charges.
IMPORTANTLY: We are just 7 months old and we already have 5 eSubmit customers. Funds from these so far have been enough to handle all expenses. I personally think, we should admire Smith and Franklin for this.
We are continuously been contacted by several publishers to use our economical and well-maintained eSubmit system. We charge very nominal fee, by the way, with full and 24 hours support. If any publishers reading this post and require this service, please do contact us at journals@smithandfranklin.com and write eSubmit in subject line. We will give you full training and 1-month free trial for one journal. (NB: we got the chance to advertise us here, thought not well reputed place to advertise, sorry for that).
SECONDLY: One should only object our business model if we leave any ambiguities. Can anyone in the world say that we charged APC despite claiming we will not? It is more important to note this fact than to where the charges come from. By saying this, we don’t criticise OA publishers who charge APC because it is down to them and that APCs are gold standards for OA. It is just that we have our own model.
4-We have previously mentioned that GooglePlay and other logos are placed because our developer continuously checking the application by placing links. We think, instead of using such logo for legitimate purposes, as was portrait, it is opposite that when author will click on these icons and will not find any application, this will certainly damage our reputation and we are aware of this. But it is required by developers. Anyways, we will be making these services available within a week by speeding up our process.
5-Most of the social media links are active and the one which are not such as link to YouTube can only be placed once we are stable enough to be framed. We continuously change our website/tabs to have better presentation. We apologise for any inconvenient this may cause and we will try our best to make them all active soon. But again, do you think not having proper few social media links will make a publisher “predator” forgetting and not realising the efforts those are putting to make the things running?
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by muafipaciran
Hi Prof…what’s your opinion about “Interdisciplinary Journal of Information, Knowledge, and Management (IJIKM)”. http://www.informingscience.us/icarus/journals/ijikm/indexed
In web was written that this journal indexed by
‘ Indices and Directories Listing this Journal
Cabell’s Directory of Publishing Opportunities in Computer Science and Business Info Systems
Cabell’s Directory of Publishing Opportunities in Educational Technology & Library Science
Cabell’s Directory of Publishing Opportunities in Management
Compendex
Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
Elsevier
EBSCO
Index of Information System Journals
Ulrichs”,
Thanks Prof Jeffey….
Regards..muafipaciran-Lamongan
↧
↧
Comment on Savvy Science Publisher Not So Savvy by l_tory
I’ve just received an invitation to “Join the Editorial Board of Global Journal of Epidemiology and Public Health” from the same Dr. Saiqa Mushtaq….
↧
Comment on I get complaints about Frontiers by John Mashey
Frontiers has been in the news, as in Eli Rabett's <a href="http://rabett.blogspot.com/2014/04/amway-science.html" rel="nofollow">Amway Science</a>. or Ugo Bardi's <a href="http://cassandralegacy.blogspot.it/2014/04/recursive-fury-reasons-of-frontiers.html" rel="nofollow">"Recursive Fury:" the reasons of Frontiers' blunder </a> (explaining why he quotas an editor or <a href="http://2risk.wordpress.com/2014/04/17/frontiers-retraction-controversy/#comment-1404" rel="nofollow">concerns of a potential associate edtior.</a>
↧
Comment on List of Predatory Publishers 2014 by Dr. Md. Shazedur Rahman
OMG..they are in plenty…there should be an online screening authority for us to check before submission….will anyone volunterr this please!
↧
Comment on Introduction to “Super Closed Access Journals” by Michael Brown
The following text from page 4 of “Forensic Accounting – A Growing Niche in the Field of Accountancy” by Dr. Consolacion Fajardo (The Journal of American Academy of Business, Cambridge; Vol. 19; Num. 2; March 2014) seems to be available online from various sources (e.g., http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/155936 from 2006). It is not obvious from the paper that the text is quoted from another source.
######
The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (commonly known as the SEC) is a United States government agency having primary responsibility for enforcing the Federal securities laws and regulating the securities industry. The SEC was created by section 4 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (now codified as 15 U.S.C. § 78d). In addition to the 1934 Act that created it, the SEC enforces the Securities Act of 1933, the Trust Indenture Act of 1939, the Investment Company Act of 1940, the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, the Sarbanes- Oxley Act of 2002 and other statutes.
The SEC was established by the Congress in 1934 as an independent, non-partisan, quasi-judicial regulatory agency following years of depression caused by the Great Crash of 1929. The main reason for the creation of the SEC was to regulate the stock market and prevent these and other abuses. The SEC was given the power to (1) license and regulate stock exchanges. Currently, SEC is responsible for administering seven major laws that governs the securities industry. They are: Securities Act of 1933, Securities Exchange Act of 1934, Public Utility Holding Company Act of 1935, Trust Indenture Act of 1939, Investment Company Act of 1940, Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and, most recently, Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. The enforcement authority given by Congress allows the SEC to bring civil enforcement against individuals or companies found to have committed accounting fraud, provided false information, engaged in insider trading or violations of other provisions of the securities law. The SEC also works with criminal law enforcement agencies to prosecute individuals and companies alike for severe offenses. To achieve its mandate, the SEC requires that public companies submit quarterly and annual reports, as well as other periodic reports. As part of the annual reporting requirement, the company’s top management must provide a narrative account in addition to the numbers called the “management discussion and analysis” which provides an overview of the previous year of operations and how the company fared in that time period. Management will usually also touch on the upcoming year, outlining future goals and approaches to new projects. In an attempt to level the playing field for all investors, the SEC maintains an online database called EDGAR (the Electronic Data Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval system) online from which investors can access this information (SEC).
↧
↧
Comment on Science Magazine Conducts Sting Operation on OA Publishers by Rupesh Kumar
Looking forward to reading the issue…great validation of your work, Jeffrey!
↧
Comment on Science Magazine Conducts Sting Operation on OA Publishers by stingoperationrupesh
OMICS never change. Please dont submit to OMICS
↧
Comment on LIST OF PUBLISHERS by Open Science
[…] after John Bohannon’s “sting”. Moreover one of this publishers is also mentioned on Jeffrey Beal list. Directory of Open Access Journals includes both of this questionable companies. Please be careful […]
↧
Comment on Have I Discovered the Source of the Hijacked Journals? by Ali Coruh
Due to my research, like most of the others, pensee is not a hijecked journal but cheater. They publish the journals from Europa (because they afraid of being sued) but not out of Europe. You cannot even access the erticles they published in Thomson Routers. They Just cheat the money and write on blogs that pensee is hijecked. Actoally Dafee is seems to be sitting on the cheated money.
↧
↧
Comment on Have I Discovered the Source of the Hijacked Journals? by Jeffrey Beall
I disagree.
Please share your research.
↧
Comment on Would You Submit a Paper to This Publisher? by Katrin
The first thing I saw on the website is this:
“Good Viruses Will Fight Acne as 1915 Discovery Revived”
What the heck does that even mean?!
↧
Comment on A list of Print-on-demand publishers, self-publishing/”Vanity presses” and other non-traditional publishers for librarians and authors by Katrin
GRIN will publish *everything*. Someone I went to university with published her undergraduate class essays there.
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
