Apart from PLoS & PeerJ, the business of open publishing looks more and more like a money-taking racket http://news.sciencemag.org/people-events/2015/05/open-access-publisher-sacks-31-editors-amid-fierce-row-over-independence …
-
-
Replying to @timothycbates
@timothycbates PLOS demands obscene amounts to publish, so they are very much in the money taking game. https://www.plos.org/publications/publication-fees/ …2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @KirkegaardEmil
@KirkegaardEmil Hopefully the next 2 years see academic societies shift to in-house, ultra-low-cost publishing on open-source software.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @timothycbates
@timothycbates Don't really need costs at all. Websites are fairly cheap. Even a small grant every year can cover journals.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @KirkegaardEmil
@KirkegaardEmil Elsevier don't burn money we give them: software devt costs. But yeah, UK jrnl budget (~£4e7) would cover cost for world.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
@timothycbates Not that much. I know, I'm a software developer and web designer. :) Look http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2009/06/01/consumer-price-index-oa/ … alsohttps://alexholcombe.wordpress.com/2013/01/09/scholarly-publishers-and-their-high-profits/ …
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.