[Open-access] [open-science] how open is it

Thu Oct 11 19:19:33 UTC 2012

Spot on.  The altmetrics hackathon is about getting together ANYONE AND
EVERYONE interested in helping to build things that will inform future
metrics.  It is early for standards, but it is high time for experimenting!

There are scholars-turned-builders emerging from all over the place to help
explore the future of scholarly communication.  Jason Priem and I are two,
Todd Vision at Dryad is another, Martin Fenner now at PLOS is another, Mark
Hahnel of figshare is another, Elizabeth Iorns of Science Exchange, William
Gunn at Mendeley, I won't bore you with a laundry list but there are oodles
more in academia and out....
If we are publisher friends now, it is because we've found ourselves
working side by side to build real things :)

Please join us, everyone!  The hackathon is going to be great: San
Francisco on Sat Nov 3rd.  Everyone is welcome, whether you code or
not.  Register
here <http://altmetricshackathon2012.eventbrite.com/>, view ideas and share
your own here<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hJixj2z6oSpFIosQQlGXFbrOBLR8te3VZgzdvcMedTA/edit#bookmark=id.atzvn4t9is2s>,
can't wait to meet you!

Heather

--
Heather Piwowar
cofounder of ImpactStory <http://impactstory.it/>: tell the full story of
your research impact.
postdoc at Duke University and NESCent
  working from UBC in Vancouver, Canada
@researchremix <http://twitter.com/#!/researchremix>

On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 11:56 AM, William Gunn <william.gunn at gmail.com>wrote:

> Your point is well taken, Heather, but this is really about getting
> together *anyone* who has an interest in thinking through new ways of
> doing things. This is a long, long ways from anything approaching a
> standard, and much more input from various communities will be
> solicited, because the whole point, as I wrote earlier this month (
>
> http://www.guardian.co.uk/higher-education-network/blog/2012/sep/06/mendeley-altmetrics-open-access-publishing
> ) is for us to get away from the "one metric to rule them all"
> situation we have had.
>
> So this process will be led by those who put in the time and effort to
> develop an implementation, which means that it will have input from
> scholars both in and out of academia. I am one such scholar who cares
> enough to devote time to work on this, Jason, Heather and Jennifer are
> also scholars who are devoting their time to this, and that's why
> we're spreading the word.  Any assistance you can provide in
> recruiting interested stakeholders is more than welcome.
>
>
> William Gunn
> +1 646 755 9862
> http://synthesis.williamgunn.org/about/
>
> Support free access to scientific journal articles arising from
> taxpayer-funded research: http://wh.gov/6TH
>
>
> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Heather Morrison <hgmorris at sfu.ca>
> wrote:
> > This is interesting indeed, thanks for sharing William.
> >
> > Comment:
> >
> > Developing standards for assessing research and ranking for scholars is
> a process that should be led by scholars, not by publishers and a few of
> their friends. In other words, this is not a legitimate process for
> developing standards for measuring academics, so both the process and
> likely the results should be fought tooth and nail by scholars.
> >
> > The publisher tail should not be wagging the researcher dog. On this
> point, it doesn't really matter whether the publisher tail is open access
> or toll access.
> >
> > best,
> >
> > Heather Morrison
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/open-access/attachments/20121011/4eadd2cc/attachment.html>