[okfn-discuss] about open access but not open access

[Bastien]

Hi Simone,

Simone Aliprandi <simone.aliprandi at gmail.com> writes:

>> > It is a matter of intellectual consistency.
>>
>> I would welcome open access publications about non-open access
>> systems, so I don't think there is any inconsistency here.
>
> Yes, I understand... but it is not the same thing.
> Openness is also a philosophy, a style of life; and it has an
> important ethical component. If you write about openness, saying that
> openness is "cool", that it is the right way... how can you release
> your work in a non-open way?

I'm not sure what "Openness is also a philosophy, a stlye of life"
means.  Where do you start, where do you stop?  For example, Marc in
this thread is using Microsoft Outlook for sending emails.  Should
we blame him?

My humble point of view (and experience from the last 15 years) is
that pointing at such "inconsistencies" is not efficient.  In general,
it does not help people change.  ("Marc, can you use another mail
client to be more consistent with the values you are promoting?"
This would sound rude to me.)

That said, I agree there is a lot of "open source washing" around
here, people want to look cool, as you say.  This should be pointed
out, but not directly fought, as it is a big time sink.

-- 
 Bastien