[Open-access] CC-BY

Wed Sep 4 20:52:22 UTC 2013

On Wednesday, September 4, 2013, 10:29:31 PM, you wrote:

>> Just PLoS ONE alone has published almost 100k OA articles since its inception. Now editors are going through all of these articles and picking the 'best' ones for a compilation in a book.

> Would that it were so. I am pretty darned certain that their selection
> process is:
> http://lmgtfy.com/?q=site%3Aplosone.org+ecology+desert

Possibly, perhaps even likely - but who's to say that this isn't pretty much what CNS editors are doing when deciding what to send out for review? So in sticking with the "quality by selection" meme, that's how I put it - why use different assumptions for the same opaque process? :-)

I actually don't really care how CNS or Apple select - chances are it's useless to me (and potentially most others) either way. But if one such useless selection is touted as "the best" without evidence, I damned well can claim "the best" for any other such opaque and useless exercise. :-)

Bjoern

-- 
Björn Brembs
---------------------------------------------
http://brembs.net
Neurogenetics
Universität Regensburg
Germany