#Tag
Log in
CRAFT-OA
CRAFT-OA
@craftoa@mastodon.online  ·  activity timestamp 3 weeks ago
Thomas Gerdes
Thomas Gerdes
@ThomasGerdes@openbiblio.social  ·  activity timestamp last month
Thomas Gerdes
Thomas Gerdes
@ThomasGerdes@openbiblio.social  ·  activity timestamp last month
Björn Brembs and 1 other boosted
Alex Holcombe
Alex Holcombe
@alexh@fediscience.org  ·  activity timestamp 2 months ago
Dear Dr. [redacted], It was nice to meet you at [redacted]! Thanks for thinking of me as a possible reviewer, as I am interested in the topic. However, I decline to review this manuscript - I often do this in the case of journals published by profiteering corporate publishers. For Nature Communications, Nature Publishing Group charges an outrageous US$6990 to authors that has little to do with higher-quality service or journal processes and lots to do with a legacy first-mover advantage that it uses to exploit academia. This is rentier capitalism. NPG funnels papers they reject from their most prestigious outlets to their newer subsidiary journals such as Nature Communications and Nature Communications Psychology, which academics go along with because they don’t (directly) foot the bill, and because, given the pressure academics are under to publish rapidly, they wish to take advantage of the reviews they may have already received from the higher-tier Nature journal. Because we are now live in a world where most studies can eventually be published somewhere, NPG has been able to exploit this by creating their own lower-tier journals and charging high-aspiration authors for the convenience. This practice conflicts with my interest in universities and funders not wasting their money,
Dear Dr. [redacted], It was nice to meet you at [redacted]! Thanks for thinking of me as a possible reviewer, as I am interested in the topic. However, I decline to review this manuscript - I often do this in the case of journals published by profiteering corporate publishers. For Nature Communications, Nature Publishing Group charges an outrageous US$6990 to authors that has little to do with higher-quality service or journal processes and lots to do with a legacy first-mover advantage that it uses to exploit academia. This is rentier capitalism. NPG funnels papers they reject from their most prestigious outlets to their newer subsidiary journals such as Nature Communications and Nature Communications Psychology, which academics go along with because they don’t (directly) foot the bill, and because, given the pressure academics are under to publish rapidly, they wish to take advantage of the reviews they may have already received from the higher-tier Nature journal. Because we are now live in a world where most studies can eventually be published somewhere, NPG has been able to exploit this by creating their own lower-tier journals and charging high-aspiration authors for the convenience. This practice conflicts with my interest in universities and funders not wasting their money,
Dear Dr. [redacted], It was nice to meet you at [redacted]! Thanks for thinking of me as a possible reviewer, as I am interested in the topic. However, I decline to review this manuscript - I often do this in the case of journals published by profiteering corporate publishers. For Nature Communications, Nature Publishing Group charges an outrageous US$6990 to authors that has little to do with higher-quality service or journal processes and lots to do with a legacy first-mover advantage that it uses to exploit academia. This is rentier capitalism. NPG funnels papers they reject from their most prestigious outlets to their newer subsidiary journals such as Nature Communications and Nature Communications Psychology, which academics go along with because they don’t (directly) foot the bill, and because, given the pressure academics are under to publish rapidly, they wish to take advantage of the reviews they may have already received from the higher-tier Nature journal. Because we are now live in a world where most studies can eventually be published somewhere, NPG has been able to exploit this by creating their own lower-tier journals and charging high-aspiration authors for the convenience. This practice conflicts with my interest in universities and funders not wasting their money,
Alex Holcombe
Alex Holcombe
@alexh@fediscience.org  ·  activity timestamp 2 months ago
Dear Dr. [redacted], It was nice to meet you at [redacted]! Thanks for thinking of me as a possible reviewer, as I am interested in the topic. However, I decline to review this manuscript - I often do this in the case of journals published by profiteering corporate publishers. For Nature Communications, Nature Publishing Group charges an outrageous US$6990 to authors that has little to do with higher-quality service or journal processes and lots to do with a legacy first-mover advantage that it uses to exploit academia. This is rentier capitalism. NPG funnels papers they reject from their most prestigious outlets to their newer subsidiary journals such as Nature Communications and Nature Communications Psychology, which academics go along with because they don’t (directly) foot the bill, and because, given the pressure academics are under to publish rapidly, they wish to take advantage of the reviews they may have already received from the higher-tier Nature journal. Because we are now live in a world where most studies can eventually be published somewhere, NPG has been able to exploit this by creating their own lower-tier journals and charging high-aspiration authors for the convenience. This practice conflicts with my interest in universities and funders not wasting their money,
Dear Dr. [redacted], It was nice to meet you at [redacted]! Thanks for thinking of me as a possible reviewer, as I am interested in the topic. However, I decline to review this manuscript - I often do this in the case of journals published by profiteering corporate publishers. For Nature Communications, Nature Publishing Group charges an outrageous US$6990 to authors that has little to do with higher-quality service or journal processes and lots to do with a legacy first-mover advantage that it uses to exploit academia. This is rentier capitalism. NPG funnels papers they reject from their most prestigious outlets to their newer subsidiary journals such as Nature Communications and Nature Communications Psychology, which academics go along with because they don’t (directly) foot the bill, and because, given the pressure academics are under to publish rapidly, they wish to take advantage of the reviews they may have already received from the higher-tier Nature journal. Because we are now live in a world where most studies can eventually be published somewhere, NPG has been able to exploit this by creating their own lower-tier journals and charging high-aspiration authors for the convenience. This practice conflicts with my interest in universities and funders not wasting their money,
Dear Dr. [redacted], It was nice to meet you at [redacted]! Thanks for thinking of me as a possible reviewer, as I am interested in the topic. However, I decline to review this manuscript - I often do this in the case of journals published by profiteering corporate publishers. For Nature Communications, Nature Publishing Group charges an outrageous US$6990 to authors that has little to do with higher-quality service or journal processes and lots to do with a legacy first-mover advantage that it uses to exploit academia. This is rentier capitalism. NPG funnels papers they reject from their most prestigious outlets to their newer subsidiary journals such as Nature Communications and Nature Communications Psychology, which academics go along with because they don’t (directly) foot the bill, and because, given the pressure academics are under to publish rapidly, they wish to take advantage of the reviews they may have already received from the higher-tier Nature journal. Because we are now live in a world where most studies can eventually be published somewhere, NPG has been able to exploit this by creating their own lower-tier journals and charging high-aspiration authors for the convenience. This practice conflicts with my interest in universities and funders not wasting their money,
Mark Carrigan
Mark Carrigan
@markcarrigan.net@markcarrigan.net  ·  activity timestamp 3 months ago