[Taxacom] ICZN procedure question

Thu Nov 11 20:41:25 CST 2010

any guess of the page count per year for 'nomenclatural publications'?

count x cost per sheet for 'good quality' paper x number of paper repositories = rough cost for everything being e-only

Paul

________________________________

From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu on behalf of Stephen Thorpe
Sent: Fri 12/11/2010 01:57
To: Doug Yanega; TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] ICZN procedure question

yes, I think we are starting to understand each other on this issue

maybe it is libraries who are driving this? If publishers can continue to make
profits by selling hard copies to libraries, then they have little or no reason
to stop producing those hard copies. On the other hand, if they can sell
e-subscriptions (with lower overheads from not having to print hard copies),
then that might be a strong reason for publishers to stop producing hard copies.
In that case, taxonomy and nomenclature are threatened by publishers wanting to
maximize profits. Sounds like the ICZN (some of whom are also publishers) have
accepted this, and plan to change the rules to suit the publisher's thirst for
higher profits. Well, that is one way to jump ... but what are the alternatives
(if any)? A lot depends on the claimed "inevitability" of hard copy being
scrapped anyway by publishers in the future. Suppose that happens. Then we do
indeed have a problem. What to do?

Suggestion (details need tweaking): it is easy nowadays for anyone to print out
text and illustrations, at least of "reasonable" quality. We don't need
publishers for that. So why not make it a requirement that for a new name to be
valid, a hard copy of the PDF from the publisher must be printed out (by anyone)
and deposited in say 6 designated ICZN "libraries" scattered around the globe.
Each library could just be a small leased office space or something?

Stephen

________________________________
From: Doug Yanega <dyanega at ucr.edu>
To: TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU
Sent: Fri, 12 November, 2010 2:33:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] ICZN procedure question

Stephen Thorpe wrote:

>this is an advantage of e-pubs over hard copy, but NOT an advantage of e-ONLY
>
>take ZooKeys as a good example: they publish hardcopy AND open
>access electronic versions of the same articles, so you get the
>advantage of worldwide free access, along with the advantage of
>solid long-term archiving of the hard copy
>
>we have both, so why ditch one?

Because WE are not the ones publishing these journals, and many of
the people who ARE publishing these journals are going to ditch paper
copies whether WE like it or not. Refusing to accept the *absolutely
inevitable* abandonment of hard copies by major, reputable,
peer-reviewed publishers is not going to improve the standing of the
ICZN or ICBN. The Codes cannot remain relevant, and expect
compliance, if they insist on something which the publishers will not
accept, and many authors do not care about enough to fight for. There
are now ample examples - many of them discussed here in the past - to
demonstrate that there are plenty of authors in the paleontological
community, at least, who are perfectly happy to publish new taxon
descriptions in e-only journals even if the Codes indicate that their
taxa are not validly published. This isn't hypothetical: we have told
people "We will ignore what you publish if it isn't Code-compliant"
and some people's response has been "Then we will publish anyway, and
ignore your silly antiquated Code". I have visions of John Cleese
doing a bad French accent and hurling insults at us from atop a
castle.

Do you honestly expect authors to stop submitting papers to places
like Nature or Science or PLoS unless they are given reassurances
that hard copies will be printed and archived?

To finish the thought, you asked:

"who wants e-only and how will they benefit from it?"

Who wants it? (A) Publishers, and (B) authors who want minimal page
charges. The former get to make more money, the latter get to keep
more of what little money they have. I wouldn't be surprised if
libraries would also prefer e-only, for similar reasons. If you want
to stop this trend in its tracks, you are going to have to come up
with a darn good reason that all these people should MAINTAIN the
production of hard copy versions - and it has to be a reason that has
nothing to do with the Code(s). Jim Croft commented:

"but I really worry about entrusting
something as important as the establishment of a new taxon name to
ONLY something as demonstrably fickle, unreliable and evanescent as
the realm on the internet."

Lots of taxonomists worry about this, but since taxonomists are not
the ones publishing it all, it is out of their hands. "For the good
of taxonomy" is not going to convince anyone. I've suggested in the
past that we take control and publish it all ourselves, as both
digital and hard copy, but the volumes of hate mail that proposal
generated make it clear that it isn't an option.

Sincerely,
--

Doug Yanega        Dept. of Entomology        Entomology Research Museum
Univ. of California, Riverside, CA 92521-0314        skype: dyanega
phone: (951) 827-4315 (standard disclaimer: opinions are mine, not UCR's)
              http://cache.ucr.edu/~heraty/yanega.html
  "There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness
        is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82

_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these
methods:

(1) http://taxacom.markmail.org <http://taxacom.markmail.org/> 

Or (2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom 
your search terms here

_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:

(1) http://taxacom.markmail.org <http://taxacom.markmail.org/> 

Or (2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here

************************************************************************
The information contained in this e-mail and any files transmitted with it is confidential and is for the exclusive use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient please note that any distribution, copying or use of this communication or the information in it is prohibited. 

Whilst CAB International trading as CABI takes steps to prevent the transmission of viruses via e-mail, we cannot guarantee that any e-mail or attachment is free from computer viruses and you are strongly advised to undertake your own anti-virus precautions.

If you have received this communication in error, please notify us by e-mail at cabi at cabi.org or by telephone on +44 (0)1491 829199 and then delete the e-mail and any copies of it.

CABI is an International Organization recognised by the UK Government under Statutory Instrument 1982 No. 1071.

**************************************************************************