Scientific Publishing Is A Rip-Off

[cancel2 2022]

It does me baffle why people who habituate the left side of the aisle are so anxious to defend this despicable practice. you're a strange lot and no.mistake.

[Micawber]

Here is a solution:


Rather than spending time whining about this on an obscure message board, just email the researcher (who's contact into is publically available) and ask them for a PDF of their paper.

It takes ten seconds to do that.

I have done it literally dozens, if not hundreds of times, and have never had a researcher tell me to piss off. They are more than happy to share their papers.

When asking this professional courtesy in due course, is it often the case that you disclose that you are a climate science denier and that you have predetermined
your intention to anonymously trash their scholarly research in unaccountable blogs even though you have not read it yet when you ask this favor? Or should poon hold that card close?

[Irish Exit]

This is very true, how did we get to the crazy situation where publically funded research is hidden by a paywall? For once I agree totally with George Monbiot.



Read more: https://principia-scientific.org/sci...-is-a-rip-off/

It is a trade-off of sorts. Thesis embargoes are a perpetual area of contention, for instance.

[Micawber]

Havana poons threads are like he is sucking on a flamethrower for group amusement.

[Cypress]

When asking this professional courtesy in due course, is it often the case that you disclose that you are a climate science denier and that you have predetermined
your intention to anonymously trash their scholarly research in unaccountable blogs even though you have not read it yet when you ask this favor? Or should poon hold that card close?

I think it is always a professional courtesy to disclose your intent when contacting a researcher for their publications. That's what I do.

Transparency and honesty are always a sign of character. I think if a Evolution Denier-Flat Earther-Climate Denier has ulterior motives, they should disclose that they have no expertise in climate science, no training, no track record of publications, they should disclose that they simply want to see if they can poke holes in the research, submit it for rightwing "blog review:", or cherry pick a quote or two to put the scientist in the worst light possible.

I mean, that is basically what the Deniers did with their fake Climate Gate non-scandal - aka, attempted to slander and libel competent scientists who were just trying to do their job.

[cancel2 2022]

It looks like there is a revolution about to occur in the scientific publishing world, let's hope it catches on like the Open Software movement and Creative Commons.

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/journal/rsos

http://www.sciencepublishinggroup.co...eb.20180302.11

[cancel2 2022]

Of course as always, reactionary forces like Elsevier are attempting a fightback. They have been cashing on their mulch is for many years and aren't going to give up without a fight.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/...ence-in-europe