On 5-May-08, at 7:17 PM, Ian.Russell wrote:
> I think, though, that parasitic describes the nature of
> unfunded mandates requiring deposit into repositories
which
> rely on certification from journals rather well. It
was
> intended to be descriptive rather than pejorative and
is
> actually highly accurate.
Ian, what do you mean by "unfunded mandates" to
deposit?
And what would you consider funded, nonparasitic mandates?
I understood you to have replied, earlier, that by this you
do
*not* mean "double-dipping" -- i.e., you do *not*
mean publishers
expecting to be paid via institutional subscriptions, as
usual,
and *also* to be paid extra in exchange for authors making
their
own published, certified articles OA by self-archiving
them.
Single-dipping means one or the other: either recover costs
from
subscriptions or recover costs from Gold OA publication
charges,
but not both.
So if it is not double-dipping that you mean by funded,
nonparasitic institutional mandates to make their authors'
own
published, certified articles OA by self-archiving them,
please
do say what it is that you do mean.
Stevan Harnad
|
