[open-archaeology] AIA and open access

Fri Apr 27 12:27:38 UTC 2012

Hi Andy

this has sort of arisen from developments at the AIA that happened
around the time of the skype call. The word (Sebastian can confirm) is
that there is some internal awareness that the editorial and letter
may not have been a good move but as yet that hasn't translated into
any concrete actions to remedy them. As a result, we felt the best
approach was to be cordial but to make specific requests of the AIA
that encourage wider OA awareness (or at the very least, don't
actively militate against it).

Cheers

L.

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 1:20 PM, Andrew Bevan <a.bevan at ucl.ac.uk> wrote:
> The draft at the bottom looks fine, but its quite a departure from the content of the earlier one. Perhaps this is a reflection of further skype discussion, but for what it is worth, I wonder whether it might not be useful to keep much more of the point-by-point focus and referencing of the original?
>
> Andy
>
>
>
> On 27 Apr 2012, at 13:51, Leif Isaksen wrote:
>
>> Hi all
>>
>> there's now a draft letter at the bottom of the ether pad for those
>> who want to add their names to it. The focus is directly on the AIA's
>> actions (past and future), rather than on the general issues, and from
>> the perspective of archaeologists based outside the US. Thoughts on
>> where to post/publish it are welcome.
>>
>> Best
>>
>> L.
>>
>> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 8:30 AM, Stefano Costa <stefano.costa at okfn.org> wrote:
>>> Il 23/04/2012 16:59, Sebastian Heath ha scritto:
>>>
>>>> The AIA is sometimes slow moving but "incredibly stuffy" doesn't quite
>>>> capture the range of people in either the membership or on the board.
>>>> And there's no reason to think the board actually had a hand in this.
>>>> There is a lot of anger about the statement over here.
>>>
>>>
>>> Sebastian and Chuck Jones have now published a response at AWBG:
>>> http://ancientworldbloggers.blogspot.com/2012/04/aia-and-open-access-response.html
>>>
>>> The outcome of the Skype call we had on Monday (available at the bottom of
>>> the etherpad http://archeo.okfnpad.org/responsetoaia ) was that the working
>>> group should take a public position supporting those AIA members who are not
>>> comfortable either with the position stated in Bartman's editorial, or with
>>> the AIA response to the consultation held in November 2011 (the two are,
>>> roughly speaking, equivalent).
>>>
>>> If deemed useful, we could turn our response into a public petition.
>>>
>>> Ciao and "buon 25 aprile",
>>> Stefano
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> open-archaeology mailing list
>>> open-archaeology at lists.okfn.org
>>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-archaeology
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> open-archaeology mailing list
>> open-archaeology at lists.okfn.org
>> http://lists.okfn.org/mailman/listinfo/open-archaeology
>>
>