Re: Distinguishing the Essentials from the Optional Add-Ons

From: George Lundberg <GLundberg_at_MEDSCAPEINC.COM>
Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2001 17:10:27 -0400

i certainly can agree with one point
the market will decide
however i would not count on any "windfall savings" unless there is a
secure on-going revenue stream
and that is, of course, a fundamental problem with any "giveaway" product

-----Original Message-----
From: Stevan Harnad []
Sent: Wednesday, July 25, 2001 3:46 PM
Subject: Distinguishing the Essentials from the Optional Add-Ons

On Wed, 25 Jul 2001, George Lundberg wrote:

> and, believe it or not, editors perform a (some) useful function(s), or at
> least editors and publishers seem to think they do
> of course i am biased (ie informed)

And those functions are part of the peer review implementation costs
(selecting referees, processing referee reports, providing editorial
dispositions). (Would you agree that 23 years as Editor of a paper
journal and 11 years as Editor of an online journal qualifies me as
somewhat informed too?)

Here's an algorithm for parsing the essentials from the optional
add-ons: Whatever is needed to generate the final refereed draft is
essential (and its true costs can and will be paid). The rest is
optional. The add-ons can of course continue to be sold for as long as
there is a market for them (and that might be forever), in which case
there is no problem about how to pay for the essentials: the add-ons
do. But there is no longer any justification whatsoever for trying to
hold the essentials hostage to the add-ons -- not even for another

If the add-ons are indeed valued in their own right, they will continue
to be paid for even after the essentials (the peer-reviewed final
drafts) are available free for all online. If not, the essentials can
be paid for out of the windfall savings from the cancellation of the

Stevan Harnad
Professor of Cognitive Science
Department of Electronics and phone: +44 23-80 592-582
             Computer Science fax: +44 23-80 592-865
University of Southampton
Highfield, Southampton

NOTE: A complete archive of the ongoing discussion of providing free
access to the refereed journal literature online is available at the
American Scientist September Forum (98 & 99 & 00 & 01):

You may join the list at the site above.

Discussion can be posted to:

This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the sender or call Medscape at 877-676-1597.
Received on Wed Jan 03 2001 - 19:17:43 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Fri Dec 10 2010 - 19:46:11 GMT