Budapest Open Access Initiative      

Budapest Open Access Initiative: BOAI Forum Archive

[BOAI] [Forum Home] [index] [prev] [next] [options] [help]

boaiforum messages

{Disarmed} [BOAI] Beyond Double-Dipping: Free-Choice Fair Gold vs. Forced-Choice Fool's Gold

From: Stevan Harnad <amsciforum AT gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2013 09:38:52 -0400



--047d7bf10aa8d0dce504e9a4fcfc
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Sandy Thatcher <sgt3 AT psu.edu> wrote:

**
> Stevan is absolutely right on this point, and it behooves publishers who
> operate hybrid journals to make their finances transparent. Otherwise,
> there will always remain the suspicion that the publishers are
> double-dipping.
>
*Alice Meadows<http://exchanges.wiley.com/blog/2013/10/07/open-access-in-th=
e-uk-will-gold-or-green-prevail/#comment-1096460637>
* (Social Relations at
Wiley<http://exchanges.wiley.com/blog/author/alicejmeadows/page/2/>,
and one of the "chefs" in SSP's Scholarly
Kitchen<http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2012/07/09/welcome-our-newest-ch=
ef-alice-meadows/>)
replied:

"*Most major publishers, including Wiley, now have a policy on 
subscription
pricing for hybrid journals (aka double dipping). Ours can be found
here<http://olabout.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-816521.html>
.*"

As I have already pointed out in my reply to Bob Campbell (below) what
matters incomparably more (to research, researchers, and the tax-payers who
fund them) than whether or not a hybrid Gold publisher double-dips is *whet=
her
the publisher embargoes Green* -- because when a hybrid Gold publisher
embargoes Green, authors who want to make their article immediately OA are
forced to pay for hybrid Gold -- *with nothing in exchange for the money
except freedom from the embargo*. (Any added frills co-bundled with it were
not asked for, hence certainly no justification for being forced to pay for
immediate OA in order to be freed from a publisher-imposed embargo.)

Wiley-Blackwell<http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/search.php?id=3D580&fIDnum=3D=
|&mode=3Dsimple&la=3Den>
is
among the 40% <http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/statistics.php> of 
publishers
that embargo Green OA. Hence (unlike a hybrid Gold publisher like Cambridge
University 
Press<http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/search.php?id=3D27&fIDnum=3D=
%7C&mode=3Dadvanced&la=3Den>,
which does *not* embargo Green) Wiley-Blackwell is forcing authors to pay
for hybrid Gold OA as the only way to provide immediate OA to their
articles. That the extra revenue from hybrid Gold revenue (despite Bob
Campbell's attempt to justify hybrid Gold revenue as not constituting
double-dipping at all) is not in fact being double-dipped by Wiley -- but
given back as a
rebate<https://www.google.ca/search?hl=3Den&lr=3D&q=3Dharnad%20OR%20Harnad%=
20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=3DUTF-8&tbm=
=3Dblg&tbs=3Dqdr:m&num=3D100&c2coff=3D1&safe=3Dactive#c2coff=3D1&hl=3Den&lr=
=3D&q=3Drebate+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&safe=3Dactive&tbas=3D=
0&tbm=3Dblg>
to
all subscribing institutions -- is no consolation for the author who has to
pay it, in full, hence again no justification for being forced to pay for
immediate OA in order to be freed from a publisher-imposed embargo. (Hybrid
Gold authors did not ask to subsidize worldwide institutional subscription
prices with their individual payment.)

Using OA embargoes to guarantee current subscription revenues is not a fair
or acceptable means of transition to universal, affordable,
sustainable OA<http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july10/harnad/07harnad.html>
and
will inevitably be exposed and seen to be exactly what it is: an attempt by
(part of) the publishing community to hold the research community
hostage<https://www.google.ca/search?hl=3Den&lr=3D&q=3Dharnad%20OR%20Harnad=
%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=3DUTF-8&tb=
m=3Dblg&tbs=3Dqdr:m&num=3D100&c2coff=3D1&safe=3Dactive#c2coff=3D1&hl=3Den&l=
r=3D&q=3Dhostage+blogurl:http%3A%2F%2Fopenaccess.eprints.org%2F&safe=3Dacti=
ve&tbm=3Dblg>
to
sustaining their current subscription revenues -- hence over-priced (and
potentially double-dipped) Fool's Gold, paid over and above what must
continue to be paid by institutions for subscriptions -- instead of
allowing Green OA to induce the natural evolution toward post-Green Fair
Gold<https://www.google.ca/search?hl=3Den&lr=3D&q=3Dharnad%20OR%20Harnad%20=
OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&ie=3DUTF-8&tbm=
=3Dblg&tbs=3Dqdr:m&num=3D100&c2coff=3D1&safe=3Dactive#c2coff=3D1&hl=3Den&lr=
=3D&q=3D%22fair+gold%22+blogurl:http%3A%2F%2Fopenaccess.eprints.org%2F&safe=
=3Dactive&tbm=3Dblg>
=2E

At 7:40 AM -0400 10/25/13, Stevan Harnad wrote:
>
> Bob 
Campbell<http://exchanges.wiley.com/blog/2013/10/07/open-access-in-th=
e-uk-will-gold-or-green-prevail/#comment-1094488522>wrote on the Wiley blog:
>
> "*Stevan* 
<http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archives/1061-.html>*=
accuses me of much conflation yet he himself conflates APCs and
> subscriptions when commenting on double-dipping. APCs are not paying for
> the 'same articles' paid for by subscriptions. Publishers have always
> charged separately for different services/products. For example, a medical
> journal may charge a pharmaceutical company for reprints, advertising spa=
ce
> and subscriptions. These are priced separately and charged separately, and
> accounted for separately in the publisher's financial management of the
> title. The pharmaceutical company does not demand that the cost of buying
> advertising space is offset against any library subscriptions.*"
>
>  Bob Campbell defends double-dipping by citing journal charges for the
> purchase of reprints, advertising and subscriptions. That's all fine.
>
> But what we are discussing here is the cost of* publication*, not of
> extra products or services.
>
> Worldwide institutional subscriptions pay the cost of publication (in
> full, and fulsomely). It is not at all clear what extra product or service
> is being paid for when an author pays for hybrid Gold OA (for the paper he
> has given the publisher, for free, to sell).
>
> Of course it's an extra source of revenue to the hybrid Gold publisher to
> force the author to pay that extra money (for whatever it is that they are
> paying for). And let there be no doubt that the payment is indeed* forced=
*(if the hybrid Gold publisher embargoes Green). Is the extra 
"service,"
> then,* exemption from the publisher-imposed Green OA embargo*?
>
> (Note: If the publisher is among the 
60%<http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/st=
atistics.php>who endorse immediate Green OA, then none of my objections mat=
ter in the
> least, and I couldn't care less if the publisher earns some extra revenue
> from those authors who are silly enough to pay for hybrid Gold OA when th=
ey
> could have had the same, cost-free, by just providing Green OA.)
>
> For the publisher who embargoes Green and then pockets the extra revenue
> derived from hybrid Gold, over and above subscriptions, without even
> reducing subscription charges proportionately, is indeed charging twice f=
or
> publication, i.e., double-dipping (and offering absolutely nothing in
> return except* freedom from the publisher's own Green OA embargo*).
>
> Subscriptions pay the cost of publication. Print reprints are an extra
> product. And adverts are an extra service. But hybrid Gold OA is merely
> fool's gold, if paid unforced. -- And if forced by a publish embargo, the=
re
> is a word to describe the practice, but I will not use it, as a publisher
> has already once threatened to sue me for libel if I do=C5=A0 So let's ju=
st call
> it double-dipping, with no extra product or service...
>
>
> *Stevan Harnad*
>
>
>
> **
>
> --
>
> **
> Sanford G. Thatcher
> 8201 Edgewater Drive
> Frisco, TX  75034-5514
> e-mail: sgt3 AT psu.edu
> Phone: (214) 705-1939
> Website: http://www.psupress.org/news/SandyThatchersWritings.html
> Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/sanford.thatcher
>
> "If a book is worth reading, it is worth buying."-John Ruskin 
(1865)
>
> "The reason why so few good books are written is that so few people 
who
> can write know anything."-Walter Bagehot (1853)
>
> _______________________________________________
> GOAL mailing list
> GOAL AT eprints.org
> http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal
>
>

--047d7bf10aa8d0dce504e9a4fcfc
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr"><div class=3D"gmail_extra">On 
Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:18 A=
M, Sandy Thatcher <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a 
href=3D"mailto:sgt3 AT psu.edu" tar=
get=3D"_blank">sgt3 AT psu.edu</a>&gt;</span> 
wrote:</div><div class=3D"gmail_=
extra"><br>
<div class=3D"gmail_quote"><blockquote 
class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margi=
n:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204=
);border-left-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><u></u>
<div>
<div>Stevan is absolutely right on this point, and it behooves
publishers who operate hybrid journals to make their finances
transparent. Otherwise, there will always remain the suspicion that
the publishers are 
double-dipping.</div></div></blockquote><div><blockquote=
 style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-seri=
f;font-size:13px"><strong><a 
href=3D"http://exchanges.wiley.com/blog/2013/1=
0/07/open-access-in-the-uk-will-gold-or-green-prevail/#comment-1096460637" 
=
style=3D"color:rgb(0,51,102)">Alice 
Meadows</a></strong>=C2=A0(Social Relat=
ions at=C2=A0<a 
href=3D"http://exchanges.wiley.com/blog/author/alicejmeadow=
s/page/2/" style=3D"color:rgb(0,51,102)">Wiley</a>, and 
one of the &quot;ch=
efs&quot; in=C2=A0<a 
href=3D"http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2012/07/09/=
welcome-our-newest-chef-alice-meadows/" 
style=3D"color:rgb(0,51,102)">SSP&#=
39;s Scholarly Kitchen</a>) replied:<blockquote>
&quot;<em>Most major publishers, including Wiley, now have a policy 
on subs=
cription pricing for hybrid journals (aka double dipping). Ours can be foun=
d=C2=A0<a 
href=3D"http://olabout.wiley.com/WileyCDA/Section/id-816521.html"=
 style=3D"color:rgb(0,51,102)">here</a>.</em>&quot;</blockquote>
</blockquote><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,h=
elvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px">As I have already pointed out in my 
rep=
ly to Bob Campbell (below) what matters incomparably more (to research, res=
earchers, and the tax-payers who fund them) than whether or not a hybrid Go=
ld publisher double-dips is=C2=A0</span><em 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);fo=
nt-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px">whether 
the pu=
blisher embargoes Green</em><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:=
verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px">=C2=A0-- because 
when a =
hybrid Gold publisher embargoes Green, authors who want to make their artic=
le immediately OA are forced to pay for hybrid Gold --=C2=A0</span><em 
styl=
e=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;fon=
t-size:13px">with nothing in exchange for the money except freedom from 
the=
 embargo</em><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,h=
elvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px">. (Any added frills co-bundled with 
it =
were not asked for, hence certainly no justification for being forced to pa=
y for immediate OA in order to be freed from a publisher-imposed embargo.)=
=C2=A0</span><br 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,hel=
vetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px">
<br 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-s=
erif;font-size:13px"><a 
href=3D"http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/search.php?id=
=3D580&amp;fIDnum=3D|&amp;mode=3Dsimple&amp;la=3Den" 
style=3D"color:rgb(0,5=
1,102);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Wiley=
-Blackwell</a><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,=
helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px">=C2=A0is among 
the=C2=A0</span><a href=
=3D"http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/statistics.php" 
style=3D"color:rgb(0,51,1=
02);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px">40%</a><=
span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-=
serif;font-size:13px">=C2=A0of publishers that embargo Green OA. Hence 
(unl=
ike a hybrid Gold publisher like <a 
href=3D"http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/s=
earch.php?id=3D27&amp;fIDnum=3D%7C&amp;mode=3Dadvanced&amp;la=3Den">Cambrid=
ge University Press</a></span><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-famil=
y:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px">, which 
does=C2=A0</sp=
an><em 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,san=
s-serif;font-size:13px">not</em><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-fam=
ily:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px">=C2=A0embargo 
Green)=
 Wiley-Blackwell is forcing authors to pay for hybrid Gold OA as the only w=
ay to provide immediate OA to their articles. That the extra revenue from h=
ybrid Gold revenue (despite Bob Campbell&#39;s attempt to justify hybrid 
Go=
ld revenue as not constituting double-dipping at all) is not in fact being =
double-dipped by Wiley -- but given back as a=C2=A0</span><a 
href=3D"https:=
//www.google.ca/search?hl=3Den&amp;lr=3D&amp;q=3Dharnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%=
20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.org/&amp;ie=3DUTF-8&amp;=
tbm=3Dblg&amp;tbs=3Dqdr:m&amp;num=3D100&amp;c2coff=3D1&amp;safe=3Dactive#c2=
coff=3D1&amp;hl=3Den&amp;lr=3D&amp;q=3Drebate+blogurl:http://openaccess.epr=
ints.org/&amp;safe=3Dactive&amp;tbas=3D0&amp;tbm=3Dblg" 
style=3D"color:rgb(=
0,51,102);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px">re=
bate</a><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvet=
ica,sans-serif;font-size:13px">=C2=A0to all subscribing institutions -- 
is =
no consolation for the author who has to pay it, in full, hence again no ju=
stification for being forced to pay for immediate OA in order to be freed f=
rom a publisher-imposed embargo. (Hybrid Gold authors did not ask to subsid=
ize worldwide institutional subscription prices with their individual payme=
nt.)</span><br 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helve=
tica,sans-serif;font-size:13px">
<br 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-s=
erif;font-size:13px"><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana=
,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px">Using OA embargoes to 
guarantee=
 current subscription revenues is not a fair or acceptable means of=C2=A0</=
span><a 
href=3D"http://www.dlib.org/dlib/july10/harnad/07harnad.html" style=
=3D"color:rgb(0,51,102);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font=
-size:13px">transition to universal, affordable, sustainable 
OA</a><span st=
yle=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;f=
ont-size:13px">=C2=A0and will inevitably be exposed and seen to be 
exactly =
what it is: an attempt by (part of) the publishing community to hold the re=
search community=C2=A0</span><a 
href=3D"https://www.google.ca/search?hl=3De=
n&amp;lr=3D&amp;q=3Dharnad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http=
://openaccess.eprints.org/&amp;ie=3DUTF-8&amp;tbm=3Dblg&amp;tbs=3Dqdr:m&amp=
;num=3D100&amp;c2coff=3D1&amp;safe=3Dactive#c2coff=3D1&amp;hl=3Den&amp;lr=
=3D&amp;q=3Dhostage+blogurl:http%3A%2F%2Fopenaccess.eprints.org%2F&amp;safe=
=3Dactive&amp;tbm=3Dblg" 
style=3D"color:rgb(0,51,102);font-family:verdana,a=
rial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px">hostage</a><span 
style=3D"color:r=
gb(51,51,51);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px"=
>=C2=A0to sustaining their current subscription revenues -- hence over-pric=
ed (and potentially double-dipped) Fool&#39;s Gold, paid over and above 
wha=
t must continue to be paid by institutions for subscriptions -- instead of =
allowing Green OA to induce the natural evolution toward post-Green=C2=A0</=
span><a 
href=3D"https://www.google.ca/search?hl=3Den&amp;lr=3D&amp;q=3Dharn=
ad%20OR%20Harnad%20OR%20archivangelism+blogurl:http://openaccess.eprints.or=
g/&amp;ie=3DUTF-8&amp;tbm=3Dblg&amp;tbs=3Dqdr:m&amp;num=3D100&amp;c2coff=3D=
1&amp;safe=3Dactive#c2coff=3D1&amp;hl=3Den&amp;lr=3D&amp;q=3D%22fair+gold%2=
2+blogurl:http%3A%2F%2Fopenaccess.eprints.org%2F&amp;safe=3Dactive&amp;tbm=
=3Dblg" 
style=3D"color:rgb(0,51,102);font-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sa=
ns-serif;font-size:13px">Fair Gold</a><span 
style=3D"color:rgb(51,51,51);fo=
nt-family:verdana,arial,helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:13px">.</span></div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" 
style=3D"margin:0px 0px 0p=
x 0.8ex;border-left-width:1px;border-left-color:rgb(204,204,204);border-lef=
t-style:solid;padding-left:1ex"><div>
<div>At 7:40 AM -0400 10/25/13, Stevan Harnad wrote:</div>
<blockquote type=3D"cite"><a 
href=3D"http://exchanges.wiley.com/blog/2013/1=
0/07/open-access-in-the-uk-will-gold-or-green-prevail/#comment-1094488522" 
=
target=3D"_blank"><span></span>Bob Campbell</a> 
wrote on the Wiley blog:<br>

<blockquote>&quot;<a 
href=3D"http://openaccess.eprints.org/index.php?/archi=
ves/1061-.html" 
target=3D"_blank"><i>Stevan</i></a><i> 
accuses me of much c=
onflation yet he himself
conflates APCs and subscriptions when commenting on double-dipping.
APCs are not paying for the &#39;same articles&#39; paid for by
subscriptions. Publishers have always charged separately for different
services/products. For example, a medical journal may charge a
pharmaceutical company for reprints, advertising space and
subscriptions. These are priced separately and charged separately, and
accounted for separately in the publisher&#39;s financial management of
the title. The pharmaceutical company does not demand that the cost of
buying advertising space is offset against any library
subscriptions.</i>&quot;<br>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite">Bob Campbell defends double-dipping 
by
citing journal charges for the purchase of reprints, advertising and
subscriptions. That&#39;s all fine.<br>
<br>
But what we are discussing here is the cost of<i> publication</i>, 
not
of extra products or services.<br>
<br>
Worldwide institutional subscriptions pay the cost of publication (in
full, and fulsomely). It is not at all clear what extra product or
service is being paid for when an author pays for hybrid Gold OA (for
the paper he has given the publisher, for free, to sell).<br>
<br>
Of course it&#39;s an extra source of revenue to the hybrid Gold publisher
to force the author to pay that extra money (for whatever it is that
they are paying for). And let there be no doubt that the payment is
indeed<i> forced</i> (if the hybrid Gold publisher embargoes 
Green).
Is the extra &quot;service,&quot; then,<i> exemption from the
publisher-imposed Green OA embargo</i>?<br>
<br>
(Note: If the publisher is among the <a 
href=3D"http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/rom=
eo/statistics.php" target=3D"_blank">60%</a> who
endorse immediate Green OA, then none of my objections matter in the
least, and I couldn&#39;t care less if the publisher earns some extra
revenue from those authors who are silly enough to pay for hybrid Gold
OA when they could have had the same, cost-free, by just providing
Green OA.)<br>
<br>
For the publisher who embargoes Green and then pockets the extra
revenue derived from hybrid Gold, over and above subscriptions,
without even reducing subscription charges proportionately, is indeed
charging twice for publication, i.e., double-dipping (and offering
absolutely nothing in return except<i> freedom from the 
publisher&#39;s
own Green OA embargo</i>).<br>
<br>
Subscriptions pay the cost of publication. Print reprints are an extra
product. And adverts are an extra service. But hybrid Gold OA is
merely fool&#39;s gold, if paid unforced. -- And if forced by a publish
embargo, there is a word to describe the practice, but I will not use
it, as a publisher has already once threatened to sue me for libel if
I do=C5=A0 So let&#39;s just call it double-dipping, with no extra product 
=
or
service...<br>
</blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite"><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type=3D"cite"><b>Stevan 
Harnad</b></blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<u></u><pre>--=20
</pre><u></u>
<div>Sanford G. Thatcher<br>
8201 Edgewater Drive<br>
Frisco, TX=C2=A0 75034-5514<br>
e-mail: <a href=3D"mailto:sgt3 AT psu.edu" 
target=3D"_blank">sgt3 AT psu.edu</a><=
br>
Phone: <a href=3D"tel:%28214%29%20705-1939" 
value=3D"+12147051939" target=
=3D"_blank">(214) 705-1939</a><br>
Website: <a 
href=3D"http://www.psupress.org/news/SandyThatchersWritings.htm=
l" 
target=3D"_blank">http://www.psupress.org/news/SandyThatchersWritings.ht=
ml</a><br>
Facebook: <a href=3D"http://www.facebook.com/sanford.thatcher" 
target=3D"_b=
lank"><font color=3D"red"><b>MailScanner has 
detected definite fraud in the=
 website at "www.facebook.com". Do <i>not</i> trust this 
website:</b></font=
> http://www.facebook.com/sanford.thatcher</a><br>
=C2=A0<br>
&quot;If a book is worth reading, it is worth buying.&quot;-John
Ruskin (1865)<br>
<br>
&quot;The reason why so few good books are written is that so few
people who can write know anything.&quot;-Walter Bagehot (1853)<br>
</div>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
GOAL mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:GOAL AT eprints.org">GOAL AT 
eprints.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal" 
target=3D"=
_blank">http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/goal</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div>

--047d7bf10aa8d0dce504e9a4fcfc--

        
--      
To unsubscribe from the BOAI Forum, use the form on this page:
http://mailman.ecs.soton.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/boai-forum

[BOAI] [Forum Home] [index] [prev] [next] [options] [help]

 E-mail:  openaccess@soros.org .