[CoDeP] Committee on Deceptive Publishing

[Lester Ingber]

I agree about
"committee on deceptive publishing"
being too harsh.  That is, it would take a lot of proof before accusing a
journal of deceptive practices, especially in light of Open Access now
being so pervasive, as I have written to this group previously.

I understand that this is where others would like to go.  However, this is
not for me.  Please take my name off this list.

Thanks.

Lester



Prof. Lester Ingber <lester at ingber.com> <ingber at alumni.caltech.edu>
https://www.ingber.com https://alumni.caltech.edu/~ingber
https://linkedin.com/in/ingber https://google.com/+LesterIngber
https://facebook.com/lester.ingber https://twitter.com/ingber

On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 8:44 AM, Christian Mongeau <christian at mongeau.net>
wrote:

> Hello.
>
> [Sorry for the (very) late reply.]
>
> I confirm my intention to participate in the committee.
>
> How should we move on? What are the plans? Thomas said he would have
> worked on a constitution: any news?
>
> chr
>
> P.s. About the name: I don't have any strong preference over "committee"
> vs "task force" (though I slightly prefer the former); "deceptive" indeed
> seems harsh, though I'm not a native speaker, so is just a sensation and
> don't have a real altetnative. If you want my two cents I propose
> "Committee On Publishing Standards": while somehow generic, its acronym
> would give us some authority ;)
>
> Il 13:22 Lun 17/Ott/2016 Thomas Krichel <krichel at openlib.org> ha scritto:
>
>>
>>   You are receiving this mail because you expressed an interest to be
>>   on a committee that will deal with quality assurance in RePEc. I
>>   opened this email list and placed your address on it. If you are no
>>   longer interested, let me know by reply.
>>
>>   This list may be temporary, possibly to be replaced by a several
>>   lists once we have a constitution for this group. We may want to
>>   submit the constitution to the RePEc board to get a seal of
>>   approval.
>>
>>   To open the list, I needed a list name. And the list name should be
>>   tied to the committee name. So I got stuck since the committee name
>>   would say a lot about the work of the committee. It needed to be
>>   chosen with care. After much reflection, I submitted the name of
>>   "committee on deceptive publishing" to the RePEc-run list. I am not
>>   aware of any adverse reaction to it. Let me know what you think.
>>
>>   I will be happy to hand over running of the list to another person.
>>   If you are interested, let me know.
>>
>>   I will be on a flight FRA to JFK on Tuesday 25th of October.  I can
>>   work on a draft constitution at that time. After the constitution is
>>   adopted, I will try to retire and strictly limit myself to system
>>   administration matters.
>>
>> --
>>
>>   Cheers,
>>
>>   Thomas Krichel                  http://openlib.org/home/krichel
>>                                               skype:thomaskrichel
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> CoDeP-run mailing list
>> CoDeP-run at lists.openlib.org
>> http://lists.openlib.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/codep-run
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CoDeP-run mailing list
> CoDeP-run at lists.openlib.org
> http://lists.openlib.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/codep-run
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openlib.org/pipermail/codep-run/attachments/20161031/582cce0c/attachment.html>