 |
 |
Hi Ken, Apologies for the confusion about the two emails. The reply policy for the list has changed and I hadn't realised at first that I'd sent a message only to yourself. I agree with you about information overload concerns and take them seriously but think the picture can be seen in a different light that potentially rewrites the game. There are also the questions of how much pre-processing of information is appropriate, who should do it, why, how and when, who pays, and what are the advantages and disadvantages for different stakeholders at different times. I was hoping to capture this succinctly in a short email but it proved not so easy because of the multiple threads. Writing this up will take some time and I need to get on with other tasks urgently. So - for later. Thanks to Per for raising the issue! Best wishes , Terry --- Dr Terence Love PhD(UWA), BA(Hons) Engin. PGCEd, FDRS, AMIMechE, PMACM, MISI Honorary Fellow IEED, Management School Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK Director, Love Services Pty Ltd PO Box 226, Quinns Rocks Western Australia 6030 Tel: +61 (0)4 3497 5848 Fax:+61 (0)8 9305 7629 [log in to unmask] -- -----Original Message----- From: [log in to unmask] [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ken Friedman Sent: Thursday, 31 October 2013 4:37 PM To: Colleague Subject: Re: Avoid Lambert Academic Publishing and Verlag Dr Mueller Dear Terry, Thanks for your two replies. I am aware of the effect of technology and economics on publishing as well as on research and on universities. I acknowledge the problems of peer review as well. Nevertheless, my view is that you don't account seriously enough for the problems of information overload and gray literature. The problem of these meet in the way that increasing masses of gray literature make it easy for people to confuse the availability of vast amounts of inadequate or problematic information with the availability of reasonable or reliable information. The very fact that people confuse self-published papers on Academia.edu, Google, and Researchgate with peer-reviewed journal articles says more about these confusions than I care to debate on the list. This confusion is also visible in your frequent comment in past debates that you see this list as a publishing venue. I avoid this kind of confusion by using Academia.edu only to reprint previously published papers, books, or book chapters that have been subject to peer review. I make an exception for teaching notes or material presented in invited keynotes. Notes to a discussion list are not research publications, no matter how well written and supported by evidence. I do not see this list or any other as a publishing venue. As stated, I acknowledge that peer-reviewed journals have not always done as well as they might. But I did not intend to enter a debate here. I posted a few brief comments on predatory publishing that began with Per's comments, and the additional related issue led to the question of VDM. If people prefer to take your advice on VDM rather than heed my warning, they are free to do so. It seems to me the present moment in the development of universities and academic publishing is quite problematic. For those who are interest, I have posted Peter Murphy's inaugural professorial lecture at James Cook University to my Academia.edu "Teaching Notes" section, along with the slides that accompany his lecture. Following my reply to Gunnar, I will retreat to lurk mode. Yours, Ken Ken Friedman, PhD, DSc (hc), FDRS | University Distinguished Professor | Swinburne University of Technology | Melbourne, Australia | [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]> | Mobile +61 404 830 462 | Home Page http://www.swinburne.edu.au/design/people/Professor-Ken-Friedman-ID22.html<h ttp://www.swinburne.edu.au/design> Academia Page http://swinburne.academia.edu/KenFriedman About Me Page http://about.me/ken_friedman Guest Professor | College of Design and Innovation | Tongji University | Shanghai, China -- Terry Love wrote: -snip- I suggest the implication is the status quo on the valuation of the role of book and journal publishing is in significant transition. Historical academic viewpoints about the importance of publishing that might have been valid only a few years ago are fast becoming irrelevant. -snip- ----------------------------------------------------------------- PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]> Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design -----------------------------------------------------------------