Jeffrey, was this post a satire? If so, of what? Sorry if I am being dense, I just don’t get it.
Comment on The Serials Crisis is Over. by Mike Taylor
↧
↧
Comment on The Serials Crisis is Over. by Jeffrey Beall
Hey, Mike. I’ll re-phrase it in terms you should be able to understand: the serials crisis, like the sauropoda, is gone.
↧
Comment on The Serials Crisis is Over. by kcoylenet
Walt Crawford’s book, “The Big Deal and the Damage Done”, which is basically an analysis of library budgets and serials spending, would seem to indicate otherwise. You might wish to address his points. http://tinyurl.com/c24rf3w
↧
Comment on The Serials Crisis is Over. by Jeffrey Beall
I think you’ve got it backwards. He should have read the sources I cite first.
↧
Comment on The Serials Crisis is Over. by Michael Hughes (@anachronautics)
Citing five articles, one of which is an interview and another a self-citation, doesn’t give you the wherewithal to ‘declare’ anything. Perhaps you and I read that first sentence differently, but I’d revise it to remove the hubris from what is clearly a semi-supported opinion.
↧
↧
Comment on The Serials Crisis is Over. by Matt Thomas
It seems like the quotes and your argument is based on the average price per journal title but that doesn’t take into consideration that most of these titles are products that we probably would never have wanted in the first place. In order to get the ejournals we want, we are still having to pay increases in excess of inflation. Adding mediocre content to quality content doesn’t make the crisis go away. If one person paid for the “Mona Lisa” for $100M and then sold it along with one painting their child made in grade 3 for $105M, that doesn’t mean that the “Mona Lisa” has dropped in price by almost half. But I’m probably missing something.
↧
Comment on The Serials Crisis is Over. by Walt Crawford
I had in fact read most of the sources you cite. The suggestion that quotable sources, mostly publishing-related, count for more than the actual facts is an amusing one, but I think I’ll go with the real world for now. (Also, as has been said before, the serials crisis is neither the only nor the primary reason for OA.)
↧
Comment on The Serials Crisis is Over. by Joe Kraus
I agree that this doesn’t add up. The Univ. could spend like Harvard and still not get all of the content that our students and faculty need or want. You did a good job of ignoring my first point concerning the independent researchers; the big deal doesn’t help them get info at all. Open Access helps all people get better access to more information, research, and knowledge and for less cost in the long run.
↧
Comment on The Serials Crisis is Over. by Mel DeSart
Jeffrey, I don’t think anyone would argue that the unit cost for journals has gone down as a result of bundling. ARL stats showed that a number of years ago. But when the price increases on those _bundles_, which in some cases is the only way to acquire the content you really WANT, still exceed the CPI, rate of inflation, and the average materials budget increases that libraries across the country are receiving, why would anyone think the serials crisis was over???
When I still can’t buy _new_ content that my users need, and am instead paying for content my users _don’t_ need that’s part of a bundle containing content they _do_ need because purchasing that bundle is the only way I can acquire that latter chunk of content, something is still seriously wrong with the system. I would very much agree that the serials crisis has _changed_ – it doesn’t look the same as it did in the 90s – but it most definitely is not over.
↧
↧
Comment on Vanity Journals are Threatening Taxonomy by Hani Hadi
I get acceptation from International Review of
Physics (IREPHY) is this journal potential predatory publishers.thinks
↧
Comment on Appeals by Mehdi
Sir,
Thats why I asked you whether you assessed the publisher recently or not. You please read your blog spot one more time and compare your text with the present status of the publisher. You will see you are wrong. As you know, to survive in today’s global competitive market, any organization should adopt itself to new changes. Asian Research consortium follows this procedure and became a well-indexed publisher. You please update your lists by assessing your list annually. I insist that you will remove this publisher from your list, if you assess it one more time.
Regards.
↧
Comment on The Serials Crisis is Over. by Of course the serials crisis is not over, what the heck are you talking about? | Sauropod Vertebra Picture of the Week #AcademicSpring
[...] Beall’s fatuous pronouncement that The Serials Crisis is Over has been nagging away at me since it was posted yesterday. I admit my first reaction was that it [...]
↧
Comment on Appeals by Jeffrey Beall
Okay, thanks for that clarification; I will have another look.
↧
↧
Comment on Vanity Journals are Threatening Taxonomy by Jeffrey Beall
That journal’s publisher, Praise Worthy Prize, is on my list, so I recommend that you find a better journal to submit to.
↧
Comment on New Open-Access Publisher Launches with 66 Journal Titles by Galuh Sarasvati
Dear Mr. Beall,
Why are you so anti New Publishers? Only time will answer, whether they are goor or bad. However, if you judge them bad from the very beginning, is it not cruel?
Big and established publishers also have bad journals, for example: Accupuncture and related therapies (Elsevier), but you have not put Elsevier in your list yet, why?
Do you have conflict of interest?
↧
Comment on LIST OF PUBLISHERS by From Ms. Cole's Desk » Post Topic » Research Websites – Beyond Google
↧
Comment on New Open-Access Publisher Launches with 66 Journal Titles by Galuh Sarasvati
Dear SteathySleuThing,
I think that at least the publisher is not run by a one man show, because one is in China, and two are in USA
↧
↧
Comment on New Open-Access Publisher Launches with 66 Journal Titles by Jeffrey Beall
What publisher are you associated with? If a new publisher uses deception or lack of transparency as a business practice, then it deserves to be the subject of scrutiny and critical thinking. I limit my list to OA publishers and journals and Elsevier is not OA. Perhaps you want to create your own list.
↧
Comment on The Serials Crisis is Over. by openvt
I might have read your self-citation, but I hit a paywall (“$23.68 plus tax)- do you plan to archive it?
How much does UC-Denver pay for subscriptions, what percentage of your total library budget does that take up, and how has that percentage changed over the last 20 years? Thanks.
↧
Comment on The Serials Crisis is Over. by Brian Young
Quoting an interview from a publishing representative and passing it off as fact seems like a poor rhetorical strategy. From the interview, it is clear that the interviewee is dismissive of library viewpoints (referred to as negotiating tactics) but then we (those reading his interview and now your blog) are expected to accept his views as evidence of there no longer being a serials crisis.
This is an important issue that warrants discussion. Perhaps “big deals” have helped more than not. Perhaps cost per serial (of those actually paid for, not counting DOAJ and other free content that could potentially –depending on how it is reported – skew statistics) has gone down. Data on serials purchased in my field (engineering/computer science) does not support this idea.
Let’s have a conversation about it…not a list of selected quotes that may be out of context (as one reader has suggested at a blog commenting on this article) or from someone who, through their responses, has demonstrated clear bias (my opinion above).
↧
More Pages to Explore .....
