Bit cheeky to suggest the vote is off-list, when all the sparring has been on-list!

I’m all for an occasional news update on green v. gold, but not several posts a day.

Paul

From: Repositories discussion list [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Stevan Harnad
Sent: 09 October 2012 14:21
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: The content of GOAL and JISC-Repository discussion lists

If one of you is willing to solicit a vote (to be sent to you off-list, of course) I will of course comply with the outcome, if it is to disallow cross-posts from GOAL on matters relevant to relevant to both lists.

Stevan Harnad

On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 8:57 AM, Kenny Baird <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

No, I agree with you two too.  I have no interest whatsoever in green vs gold.  Suggesting that we just delete the emails does not help the community - there should be a place for discussing the practicalities of repositories but anyone looking through the archives would not see that this was the remit of this list at all.
________________________________________
From: Repositories discussion list [[log in to unmask]] on behalf of Hugh Glaser [[log in to unmask]]
Sent: 09 October 2012 13:50
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: The content of GOAL and JISC-Repository discussion lists

Thank you very, very much Charles.
Are Charles and I the only ones?
I am amazed it has all gone on this long before someone said something.

To paraphrase Charles: I have long been thinking of withdrawing from the JISC-REPOSITORIES list because I am getting bored by the constant battles between those who are green evangelists on it and those who are not.
If I am in a tiny minority (of 2), it is clearly sensible that I withdraw.
As a technologist, there is very little new coming through that can possibly interest me, and the repetition and rehearsal is staggering.
Yes, I am interested that there is a storm going on; no, I don't need to know which way the wind is blowing each hour of the day.

I am interested to find there is another lists that Charles thinks is more suitable.
Most lists I belong to have policies to deprecate cross-posting - an occasional message to point at a discussion going on on another list, possibly with a short summary, is considered acceptable. This is a good policy.
Of course if anyone can tell me of another list that might meet my expectations instead of this one, then please, please point me there.

Best to you all.
Hugh

On 9 Oct 2012, at 09:13, Garret McMahon <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> “The infrastructure of subject and institutional repositories should be developed so that they play a valuable role complementary to formal publishing, particularly in providing access to research data and to grey literature, and in digital preservation.” - Finch Report
>
>
> Tricky to avoid debating the route to OA across both lists when the role of repositories, particularly institutional repositories, has been so deliberately undermined recently.
>
> Regards,
>
> Garret McMahon
> Queen's University Belfast
>
>
> On 9 October 2012 07:42, CHARLES OPPENHEIM <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> I recently withdrew from the GOAL list because I was getting bored by the constant battles between those who are green evangelists on it and those who are not. In the past, JISC-Repositories has focussed on the practicalities of setting up and running repositories, whether Institutional or subject-based.  Increasingly, though, the religious wars debates (I use that term advisedly - the protagonists are after the same thing ultimately, but bitterly disagree over the right way there)  in GOAL have been copied over to the JISC list.
>
> I recommend that those who are interested in the debates join the GOAL list and confine their debates to that list,  that those who are not interested in such things stick to the JISC list, and those who are interested in both aspects, and are therefore on both lists, refrain from using the JISC list for such debates. Of course, many will indeed want to be on both lists, and so will not miss out on reading about, and contributing to,  the debates as well as keeping up to date on discussions on practical issues on the JISC list.  All this will make the JISC list much less regularly added to, but that is no bad thing.
>
> Charles
>
> Professor Charles Oppenheim
>
>

__________________________

Delivered via MessageLabs
__________________________

The information contained in this message and any attachments is intended for the addressee(s) only.  If you are not the addressee, you may not disclose, reproduce or distribute this message.  If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender and delete it from your system.  Any personal data sent in reply to this message will be used in accordance with provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998 and only for the purposes of the Institute's work.

All messages sent by NICE are checked for viruses, but we recommend that you carry out your own checks on any attachment to this message. We cannot accept liability for any loss or damage caused by software viruses.

http://www.nice.org.uk