Timeline for Does gold open-access with article processing charge (APC) really help access to science and save taxpayer money?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mar 31, 2014 at 12:52 | comment | added | Cape Code | 'Many academics don't self-archive' well, they should. | |
| Feb 18, 2014 at 15:54 | comment | added | darthbith | Thanks for the comments. I agree that in the short term, cost is not a great argument for OA. The far better argument is the moral one, that the public has already paid for the research and they deserve access to it. It will be interesting to see how the field changes now that the new rules in the UK are in place, or whether there will be much change at all. Thanks again! | |
| Feb 18, 2014 at 15:11 | comment | added | Fomite | @darthbith I'll add some thoughts on that shortly. | |
| Feb 18, 2014 at 15:11 | history | edited | Fomite | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Minor typo
|
| Feb 18, 2014 at 14:58 | comment | added | darthbith | Can I rephrase the question "Will OA save the taxpayers money?" to be "Under an author-pays OA system, will the public pay more for the same amount of, or less, research?" I think it is a given that taxpayers deserve access to research they have funded, but the trade off may be that less research gets done - is this trade-off worth it? I'm genuinely curious for a response from someone who has thought about this more than I have, because I'm still trying to form an opinion. Thanks! :-) | |
| Feb 18, 2014 at 14:28 | history | answered | Fomite | CC BY-SA 3.0 |