Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> If this way of putting pressure on the publishers does not work, the next step would be to ask reviewers to stop working for Elsevier. After that, scientists could be asked to stop publishing in Elsevier journals.

Why is stopping publishing in the journal the last resort? This may be my lack of understanding showing, but why wouldn't that be the first step? I would think that all the other pieces would be much more replaceable than the actual papers themselves.



Because it also has the highest impact on your scientists. Asking somebody to stop publishing in the major journals of his field is not going to get as much understanding as the weaker measures. You don't want all your potential PhD students running for the hills because they fear they won't get good publications...


The goal seems to be to reach an agreement, not to get embroiled forever. First, show your teeth. Biting can come later.

Also, that biting would be costly, especially for less established scientists. Not publishing in high-ranking journals can be bad for a career.


Because removing a single editor-in-chief is much more damaging to the publisher than removing a single author?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: