Dear JISC and ELib List members:

Here are the results of the straw poll (mostly JISC, some error because
there were 1-2 responses from E-Lib too):

AGAINST continuing AmSci Cross-Postings:
7 out of 19 (37% of sample of 19, 1.4% of jisc total 509)

FOR continuing AmSci Cross-Postings:
8 out of 19 (42% of sample of 19, 1.5% of jisc total 509)

EITHER/OR (some classification judgment madeby me here!)
4 out of 19 (21% of sample of 19, 0.7% of jisc total 509)

So it's just about neck and neck and the overall sense
seems to be to continue but with fewer cross-postings.

Polls are still open till Friday! The silent 97% still
have time to vote if this trend is against their preference.

Cheers, Stevan

--------------------------------------
AGAINST continuing AmSci Cross-Postings:
7 out of 19 (37% of sample of 19, 1.4% of jisc total 509)

1. Can I tentatively suggest that such cross-posting runs counter to normal
netiquette and that it would be better for the discussion to be carried
out on a single list - probably the American Scientist Open Access Forum?

2. Thanks for consulting.  I agree with Andy.  I would prefer not to receive
the American Scientist Open Access Forum content on JISC-Development.

3. I agree.

4. I broadly agree with Andy on this. I have found your postings to be useful
at times: they have increased my awareness of issues in the eJournal / open
access world. But there are too many of them, and there's a danger that
I'll get into the habit of deleting them without reading them and so miss
something interesting. Perhaps a summary to the list every now and then
would be more useful.

5. I agree too.  In fact, the cross-posting currently discourages me from
signing up to the Am-sci forum to follow the full discussion.  With the
situation as it is now, I would end up seeing two copies of a proportion
of the messages thru JISC-DEV, whereas if Am-sci was the main forum
where I followed open access discussion, I could manage my email more
efficently.

6. I am against cross posting, primarily because the reply threads either
diverge or are in themselves repeated.

7. I vote to stop cross-posting of the open-access discussion on
jisc-development and lis-elib.

FOR continuing AmSci Cross-Postings:
8 out of 19 (42% of sample of 19, 1.5% of jisc total 509)

1. I appreciate these messages being posted to lis-elib.

2. I would prefer the cross posting to the JISC lists to continue. Yours
are by far the most interesting items that come through, but I need to
monitor the list for other items. Suppose I could subscribe to Amsci
but... so much to do and so little time etc etc. Let us know what the
decision is.

3. There may be a case for posting to just one of the two JISCmail
lists (I'm on both, and suspect, as Andy Powell does, that the
overlap is higher than 152) but I would not support Andy's
suggestion of restricting the discussion to the AmSci forum.

4. I am a subscriber to <[log in to unmask]>.  I only have a
passing interest in self-archive (I *do* support it!), and have enjoyed
receiving your posting from time to time. However, they are sometimes
rather excessive (for my interests!)  I just delete them.
I would probably not subscribe to a special-purpose list, so would
encourage you to continue to post to <[log in to unmask]> ,
but only occasionally...

5. Your straw poll was a bit too quick for me. I value your OA postings to
jisc-development, and read them, and would
be sorry to lose them from that list.

6. For.  Keep it up.

7. Vote to stay on this list please!
Don't mind registering with AmSci if I have to, (following the thread as is
related to my PhD studies) but would like it to stay in this list!
Thanks you for all you do

8. I vote for leaving things as they are. If I end up with multiple occurrences
of the same post as a result of subscribing to both JISC and ELib that's OK.
It is going to take me longer to subscribe to AMsci then it is to delete
multiple posts

EITHER/OR:
4 out of 19 (21% of sample of 19, 0.7% of jisc total 509)

1. Is it not beyond the wit of the good folk at jisc-mail to configure their
service such that a multiple posting result in just ONE message being sent
to the end-user (perhaps with a note to say which lists it had been posted
to)?

2. Not sure what the real answer is - we need a smart one - it is useful for
people in the UK to be aware of key relevant postings if they don't belong
to the main OA one. OA is only one aspect of many people's work interests.
The sheer volume is part of the problem especially if you're away even for
a short while or not on your normal mail reader.
But I do get swamped as I belong to AMSCI, elib, jisc-dev and oai-eprints
and it takes time even to eliminate copies or digests - apart from the need
to read my lists on other subjects (which I try to minimise). I currently
try to delete 3 out of the 4 as soon as I get one or else do it in bulk
later. But then I'm in danger of missing mail I need to respond to. I
sometimes miss a non mailing list email from you as a result of the others
flooding in!.

3. It's not so much that the postings are not of interest as that getting
multiple copies is irritating, though I suppose we can just delete as we go.
I'd prefer there to be far fewer multiple posts, and only where a specific
message is likely to be of interest to another audience who might not have
an ongoing interest in an issue catered for by a particular list. Thanks to
Andy for raising it.

4. I like getting the messages but I could join the American Scientist list.
So a bit of an either or from me.